<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7652.24">
<TITLE>RE: [governance] Proposed contribution for the Hyderabad programme</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Jeff,<BR>
<BR>
The expert would not be 'from' UN. Further, since 'experts' cannot apply for a gig for which there has been no call, your question on who exactly they might be cannot be answered as yet. And I did tell you my view you on the relative weighting of the 'expert' vs self-reflective IGF reviews by governments. But that is just my opinion.<BR>
<BR>
Lee<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Jeffrey A. Williams [<A HREF="mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com">mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com</A>]<BR>
Sent: Mon 8/11/2008 11:06 PM<BR>
To: governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
Subject: Re: [governance] Proposed contribution for the Hyderabad programme<BR>
<BR>
Lee and all,<BR>
<BR>
Ok with me actually, FWTW. Still this didn't answer my questions. None the less it would<BR>
be good to have an outside review if for no other reason than for purposes of non-nepotism.<BR>
I do of course have serious reservations if the "Expert" being selected from the UN. They<BR>
have no "real world" experts, IMO.<BR>
<BR>
Lee W McKnight wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Hi,<BR>
><BR>
> I think Carlos is just being practical, since it is quite likely that an outside 'expert' group will be brought in, with the expert selected by UN staffers from amongst the applicants for the gig, whenever a call goes out requesting bids. Presuming a public call does go out. For governments and other sources of funding, the expert report might be seen as definitive, presuming it is reasonably well done.<BR>
><BR>
> The IGF engaging in self-reflection and self-criticism, is as Milton suggests also needed, and is part of the idea for the workshop some of us CSers are working on getting organized for Hyderabad, incolving also other stakeholders. And ideally will feed back into the expert report.<BR>
><BR>
> So it is not a question one or the other, it is one and the other.<BR>
><BR>
> Lee<BR>
><BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Jeffrey A. Williams [<A HREF="mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com">mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com</A>]<BR>
> Sent: Mon 8/11/2008 9:20 PM<BR>
> To: governance@lists.cpsr.org; Carlos Afonso<BR>
> Subject: Re: [governance] Proposed contribution for the Hyderabad programme<BR>
><BR>
> Carlos and all,<BR>
><BR>
> Maybe a good idea, maybe not. Whom are these "Experts"<BR>
> and what qualifies them as such? Secondly, what weight would<BR>
> such a "Expert" review vs a participants forum have?<BR>
><BR>
> Carlos Afonso wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > Milton, what about both? I mean, a review which would involve an<BR>
> > "expert" consulting group *and* a broad consultation with the Forum<BR>
> > participants?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Luckily, the "expert" group retained by the secretariat could be<BR>
> > neutral, independent, well qualified, holistic etc etc. Probably, it<BR>
> > will be none of these, but it is interesting to balance this "expert"<BR>
> > view with a consultation (which will need analysis, consolidation etc as<BR>
> > well).<BR>
> ><BR>
> > frt rgds<BR>
> ><BR>
> > --c.a.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Milton L Mueller wrote:<BR>
> > > I support this letter, but believe pretty strongly that the sentence<BR>
> > > about the review of IGF needs to be reworded thusly.<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > Old language:<BR>
> > >> it is important that a review and evaluation of the IGF<BR>
> > >> begins promptly.<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > Proposed change:<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > It is important that a review involving formal consultation with IGF<BR>
> > > participants begins promptly.<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > Hope my motivation is clear: do you want a "review and evaluation" by<BR>
> > > some hack consulting group or do you want a "formal consultation" with<BR>
> > > the people who actually constitute (or should constitute) the Forum?<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > Milton Mueller<BR>
> > > Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies<BR>
> > > XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology<BR>
> > > ------------------------------<BR>
> > > Internet Governance Project:<BR>
> > > <A HREF="http://internetgovernance.org">http://internetgovernance.org</A><BR>
> > ><BR>
> > ><BR>
> > >> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> > >> From: Adam Peake [<A HREF="mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp">mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp</A>]<BR>
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 5:34 AM<BR>
> > >> To: governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
> > >> Subject: [governance] Proposed contribution for the Hyderabad<BR>
> > >> programme paper.<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> Proposed contribution for the Hyderabad programme paper.<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> Just say yes or no.<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> Anything controversial will just mean the letter's not going to get<BR>
> > >> sent and again the caucus will have missed the opportunity to<BR>
> > >> influence the process. Bound to be spelling mistakes, typos and<BR>
> > >> messed-up grammar (friendly amendments welcome.)<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> All the ideas in response to Parminder's email so I hope they have<BR>
> > >> our coordinator's support. He can decide on rough consensus or not.<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> Adam<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> Contribution on the Hyderabad Programme Paper<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> (1) The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus fully supports the<BR>
> > >> letter sent by the Internet Bill of Rights Coalition "Rights as core<BR>
> > >> theme of the IGF". The issue of rights and the Internet must remain<BR>
> > >> a central theme of the IGF process.<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> (2) About the taking stock and way forward session: we suggest that<BR>
> > >> this session be organized in the same "bottom-up" manner as the other<BR>
> > >> main session workshops and debates. In light of para 76 of the Tunis<BR>
> > >> Agenda,<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> "76. We ask the UN Secretary-General to examine the desirability<BR>
> > >> of the continuation of the Forum, in formal consultation with Forum<BR>
> > >> participants, within five years of its creation, and to make<BR>
> > >> recommendations to the UN Membership in this regard."<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus is organizing a workshop<BR>
> > >> "The role and mandate of the IGF"<BR>
> > >> <<A HREF="http://www.intgovforum.org/workshops_08/showmelist.php?mem=71">http://www.intgovforum.org/workshops_08/showmelist.php?mem=71</A>> and<BR>
> > >> we would be pleased if this workshop could help support discussion<BR>
> > >> during the taking stock session. We would be pleased to work with<BR>
> > >> the MAG and all other stakeholders in discussions to begin the<BR>
> > >> process of review and evaluation of the IGF and how to best to<BR>
> > >> include this important topic in the taking stock and way forward<BR>
> > >> session at the Hyderabad meeting.<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> (3) The process of merging individually proposed workshops and<BR>
> > >> setting-up the working groups that are now developing the main<BR>
> > >> session workshops has been very unclear. How were some workshops<BR>
> > >> accepted in these working groups and some not? What efforts have<BR>
> > >> been made to ensure that a balanced representation of views is<BR>
> > >> present in each of the working groups organizing the main session<BR>
> > >> workshops?<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> The caucus believes this process has not worked well, we would like<BR>
> > >> clarification of the process and to be assured that all stakeholders<BR>
> > >> will have the equal opportunity to participate in the working groups<BR>
> > >> developing the main session workshops (and therefore greatly<BR>
> > >> influencing the main session debates.)<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> (4) We would like to hear about logistical arrangements for the<BR>
> > >> meetings, particularly the daily schedule (start, finish, breaks<BR>
> > >> etc), information about hotels, particularly affordable hotels, food<BR>
> > >> and refreshments, Internet cafes, and the IGF Village.<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> (5) Will there be funds to support participants from developing<BR>
> > >> countries and civil society? Could we please have details of this.<BR>
> > >> We note that the September consultations may be too late to manage a<BR>
> > >> smooth process for allocating funds. Improving participating from<BR>
> > >> developing countries has been identified as a critical issue by the<BR>
> > >> IGFs to date, we are concerned that it is not being adequately<BR>
> > >> addressed.<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> Thank you,<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus.<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> ____________________________________________________________<BR>
> > >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
> > >> governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
> > >> To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>
> > >> governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
> > >><BR>
> > >> For all list information and functions, see:<BR>
> > >> <A HREF="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A><BR>
> > >><BR>
> > > ____________________________________________________________<BR>
> > > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
> > > governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
> > > To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>
> > > governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > For all list information and functions, see:<BR>
> > > <A HREF="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A><BR>
> > ><BR>
> > ><BR>
> ><BR>
> > ____________________________________________________________<BR>
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
> > governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
> > To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>
> > governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
> ><BR>
> > For all list information and functions, see:<BR>
> > <A HREF="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A><BR>
><BR>
> Regards,<BR>
><BR>
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)<BR>
> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -<BR>
> Abraham Lincoln<BR>
><BR>
> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is<BR>
> very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt<BR>
><BR>
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;<BR>
> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by<BR>
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."<BR>
> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]<BR>
> ===============================================================<BR>
> Updated 1/26/04<BR>
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.<BR>
> div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.<BR>
> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail<BR>
> jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com<BR>
> My Phone: 214-244-4827<BR>
><BR>
> ____________________________________________________________<BR>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
> governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>
> governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
><BR>
> For all list information and functions, see:<BR>
> <A HREF="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A><BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
> Name: winmail.dat<BR>
> winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef<BR>
> Encoding: base64<BR>
<BR>
Regards,<BR>
<BR>
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)<BR>
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -<BR>
Abraham Lincoln<BR>
<BR>
"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is<BR>
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt<BR>
<BR>
"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;<BR>
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by<BR>
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."<BR>
United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]<BR>
===============================================================<BR>
Updated 1/26/04<BR>
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.<BR>
div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.<BR>
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail<BR>
jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com<BR>
My Phone: 214-244-4827<BR>
<BR>
____________________________________________________________<BR>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
<BR>
For all list information and functions, see:<BR>
<A HREF="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A><BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>