<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.apple-style-span
{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page Section1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Hi Tracy<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>As a member of several Ning communities, I’d like to say
that straight membership numbers are not really a good indicator of the
vibrancy of a group – lots of people join and visit very rarely and post
even more rarely. Ning’s notifications aren’t great, in that they
do work very hard to get you to visit the site to keep updated,( and the mobile
site shows up poorly on my phones) as opposed to sending the content of the
update via the email notification, so that people can keep up with the
discussion without having to visit the site.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>So I’d love to see some data on how many of the 646 people
have posted, how often they access/read the posts and discussions etc. and
compare with the activity on the mailing list to really compare apples and
apples.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I’m a total social network person, but I’ve found
that they do not work well for many situations, and we always need to look at
the needs, audience and objectives before talking about changing the tools.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Jacqueline<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Tracy F. Hackshaw @
Google [mailto:tracyhackshaw@gmail.com] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, 06 December 2009 07:59 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Fouad Bajwa<br>
<b>Cc:</b> governance@lists.cpsr.org; Katitza Rodriguez<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [governance] IGC<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>*Ditto about the criticism comment. All views are to be
welcomed. Surely. :0) <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>I am also not sure why it was necessary to refer to my
current employment in your response. In any event and with a view to full
disclosure, so as to avoid any misunderstanding, I have been involved with the
using and promoting the use of Internet since my days as a student and
Researcher at University (1993-1997) and have been involved with my current
Government job as a civil/public servant from 2005 designing and implementing
projects relating to digital inclusion and improving the lives of the citizens
of Trinidad & Tobago through the use of ICT.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Now, first of all, I am confused about the statements that
the discussions on improving the effectiveness of the IGC should somehow be
subsumed under the IGF threads (again difficult to achieve with a limited
mailing list format unless your email platform has an extremely effective
search facility). When last I read it, para 72 of the Tunis agenda expressly
states that the IGF is multi-stakeholder - <b>NOT</b> Civil Society focused. I
refer specifically to:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-style-span><i><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#303030'>"... Facilitate discourse <b>between
bodies dealing with different cross-cutting international public policies
regarding the Internet</b> and discuss issues that do not fall within the scope
of any existing body."</span></i></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Ginger's suggestion of starting new threads with these
improvements in mind is perhaps more useful to achieve the objective.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Secondly, at last count from <a
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/node/12/%253Cbr%2520/%253E">http://www.igcaucus.org/node/12/%253Cbr%2520/%253E</a> I
recognize that the IGC has approximately 150 members on the mailing list.<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>As a comparative example, Diplo's recently initiated Ning
community has 646 members with over 50 subject-specific sub-groups.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>If Diplo were to solicit an average annual voluntary
donation of US$10 (less than US$1 per month) from its membership for 1 year
they could collect approx. US$6,460.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Imagine now if they used those funds to do effective
outreach and recruitment, open up the discussion platform even further and
therefore triple their membership for example ...<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>The cold, hard question that needs to be asked is the status
quo a critical mass to move forward or does the IGC want or should I say need
to grow and raise its profile in order to become a louder, more vibrant voice -
representing as one group, for example, the interests of the very low-income,
grassroots members they are mandated to AS WELL AS Digital Natives?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>I have examined the IGC Charter again and for the purposes
of the discussion nothing stated there expressly limits consideration and
indeed, implementation of suggestions designed to grow and evolve the IGC into
what it is destined to become. As a matter of fact, my own interpretation of
several clauses of the Charter seems to suggest that the IGC should be doing
more than what currently obtains.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>And, on a technological note, Fouad, proper implementation
of a social networking platform can cater for all users - including those who
prefer to use a mailing list, or WAP, or SMS alerts, or even Fax - this is done
via the implementation of full alerting and posting directly via <<insert
your choice of delivery channel>> to the platform - the WWW being just
one view of the network - as a matter of fact, this is desirable. Web 2.0 and
Social Networking as we know is <b>BOTH</b> active/passive, as well as
proactive & reactive hence its beauty, popularity, and effectiveness.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Its power, when used wisely
is unmistakable. <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Fouad Bajwa <<a
href="mailto:fouadbajwa@gmail.com">fouadbajwa@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>My two cents on this:<br>
<br>
* This is for the sake of discussion and should not be taken as<br>
criticism, please!<br>
<br>
Tracy, ummm, these ideas are a bit overwhelming though I like the<br>
ideas about social networking website like using ning and we do have<br>
an example of one of our members from the DiploFoundation using it on<br>
<a href="http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org" target="_blank">http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org</a>
and many of our members can<br>
help implement it if the IGC reaches consensus to it in the near<br>
future.<br>
<br>
But, I would like to share a small case here, last whole year, I had<br>
no electricity in Pakistan for about 16-20 hours everyday and had to<br>
use a small but very expensive Edge device to access my emails and was<br>
limited in my participation because of my Internet speed at 4-10kbps.<br>
This means I can't access websites like Facebook or Ning. Similarly,<br>
some things would be of key concern regarding the afore mentioned like<br>
whether do we all in the developing world have such speedy access to<br>
the Internet to open and participate in such live discussions or the<br>
choice of passive email medium is the best route since everyone at one<br>
point in time or the other can participate equally and inclusively.<br>
Also, the issue about access of the social network on a mobile device<br>
or low-spec machines might come up and the solution for IGC is<br>
supposed to be easily, equally, inclusively accessible by all of our<br>
members and even those that are yet to join or use the Internet!<br>
<br>
I know some of these ideas may be easily implemented if this was the<br>
same as the government agency you are serving in for smaller projects<br>
but we have an IGC Charter we follow with mutual and inclusive<br>
consensus and any change to that has to be taken forward with mutual<br>
consensus and through a collaborative process that the IGC Charter<br>
provides us with.<br>
<br>
I also know a lot of IGC people that I've seen participating in the<br>
various international meetings mentioned but one also has to realize<br>
that the members usually do so by interest or voluntarily or if they<br>
find resources through fellowships and grants like you and me to put<br>
as an example.<br>
<br>
I don't know if the charging of fees is a good way to go. Most of us<br>
don't have credit cards in the developing world and we won't be able<br>
to pay up. Say the fees was set to a one time US$50, that would be Pak<br>
Rupees 4200 which is a lot of money for us and so would it be for many<br>
other nations. Maybe I can meet up with Ginger on the various<br>
occasions that I have and pay her the dues but what will the rest of<br>
the 99% of IGC do? In my personal opinion, bad idea!!!!<br>
<br>
I have learnt one thing while participating in Civil Society that we<br>
have to think about others when we plan or suggest such ideas and<br>
invite all or atleast think about the low-income and least developed.<br>
All of us are not in the best case scenario nor in the worst of<br>
conditions but still we have our limitations and we have a gather as a<br>
community to carry out a number of collective activities with regards<br>
to Internet Governance Forum and Internet Governance in general.<br>
<br>
My own feelings come down to the fact that since we are discussing<br>
restructuring of IGF in a separate discussion thread, these<br>
discussions about improving IGC functioning in proportion with the<br>
previous should also be done in the same thread so that we have a<br>
record of all these suggestions that can be later put together as<br>
suggestions for IGC. The suggestions for IGC can be moved to our<br>
website while the suggestions for the restructuring of the IGF can be<br>
collected, shared and then disseminated to the secretariat.<br>
<br>
I also like what Kati has shared as they are some wonderful ideas with<br>
the Civil Society aspect in mind and would be very useful in the<br>
future indeed that concern us all and as she mentions the meetings,<br>
those come from the Open Consultations and MAG meetings strategy for<br>
IGC!!!<br>
<br>
Lets keep the ideas flowing in!!!<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 2:56 AM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google<br>
<<a href="mailto:tracyhackshaw@gmail.com">tracyhackshaw@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
> Hi everyone:<br>
> I am not sure if this was discussed/raised/explored/shot down before,<br>
> because of the current IGC discussion list format, but from my own<br>
> experiences, here are some thoughts to move the IGC forward and attract a<br>
> wider and deeper cross-section of "civil society" (see the
excellent and<br>
> concise LSE definition of this dilemma<br>
> at <a
href="http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/CCS/introduction/what_is_civil_society.htm"
target="_blank">http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/CCS/introduction/what_is_civil_society.htm</a>):<br>
> 1. Evolve the dialog away from the dated mailing/discussion list format<br>
> towards a more transparent and open Social Networking & Collaboration<br>
> platform - I recommend that Marc Andreessen's and Giani Bianchini's<br>
> brilliant Ning technology be used as opposed to the somewhat restricted<br>
> Facebook, Orkut, and the like. Establishment of appropriate IGC presences
on<br>
> Twitter, Scribd and YouTube will also be useful. Utilization of emerging<br>
> solutions such as Google Wave should be explored. Enterprise solutions
such<br>
> as Social Text, Lotus Connections are also available if a more robust<br>
> solution is desirable.<br>
> 2. Move the IGC into the mainstream and raise its profile through a
physical<br>
> "re-launch" or "event". This event could consist of
the presentation of a<br>
> series of Civil society position papers as alluded to by Katitza. A timely<br>
> slot for this would perhaps be immediately pre-IGF 2010, or for more<br>
> diffused but consistent impact, pre-ICANN, iNET and IETF 2010<br>
> meetings/conferences.<br>
> 3. Develop a regular meeting or series of meetings where the IGC
membership<br>
> can interact and engage in strategic planning. The technology deployed if<br>
> (1) is accepted will make this extraordinarily simple - time zone<br>
> considerations aside.<br>
> 4. Develop a Strategic Plan, Operating Budget and solicit appropriate<br>
> financial support from its membership - membership growth beyond the<br>
> existing should be guaranteed by (1) and (2). The Wikipedia donation model<br>
> is instructive. I am also certain that the IGF Secretariat will provide<br>
> support if a Strategic Plan, Budget and Operational Plan for 2010-2011
were<br>
> presented.<br>
> Mobilize. Grow. Prosper.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Katitza Rodriguez<br>
> <<a href="mailto:katitza@datos-personales.org">katitza@datos-personales.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Dear IGC members:<br>
>><br>
>> I would like to see the IGC grows as a caucus. Grow not only in terms
of<br>
>> members but grows in terms of outcomes/deliverables and capacity of<br>
>> organization.<br>
>><br>
>> It is vitally important that IGC produce their own papers to
address the<br>
>> most relevant topics at the IG level. It is equally important that IGC
can<br>
>> take into account also all those collective civil society papers that
were<br>
>> released in other venues but are crucial also for the IGC debate. It
should<br>
>> be both ways. All will depend on the issue, the time, the knowledge,
the<br>
>> capacity, our energy, our passion and our capacity to make things
done,<br>
>> among many other factors.<br>
>><br>
>> We all need to learn to put in the table not only the issues that we
care<br>
>> about but also the issues that others civil society participants care
about,<br>
>> and defend all with the same passion.<br>
>><br>
>> We should be able to better organize ourselves. Having meetings every<br>
>> morning before each meeting to debrief of what's going on in each
workshop<br>
>> and be able to respond in each workshop is vitally important. Some<br>
>> groups/networks/coalition does this work. Can we do it as a whole
group?<br>
>> This can happen only if we are well organized. There were more than
111<br>
>> workshops. If we can monitor all the workshops and have always one or
two<br>
>> civil society participants able to put in the table those issues that
we<br>
>> care about, we will a better capacity to at least educate/share<br>
>> knowledge/give another point ot view to all those who are on the room,
on<br>
>> the issues that civil society participants cares about.<br>
>><br>
>> Hopefully, the candidates have a vision on this regards and can move<br>
>> forward the process. IT is a lot of work, and its not easy but we
should do<br>
>> it if we want to be effective.<br>
>><br>
>> Warm Regards<br>
>><br>
>> Katitza<br>
>> ____________________________________________________________<br>
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
>> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
>> <a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
>><br>
>> For all list information and functions, see:<br>
>> <a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance"
target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> ____________________________________________________________<br>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
> <a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
><br>
> For all list information and functions, see:<br>
> <a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance"
target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal>--<br>
Regards.<br>
--------------------------<br>
Fouad Bajwa<br>
Advisor & Researcher<br>
ICT4D & Internet Governance<br>
Member Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF)<br>
Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)<br>
My Blog: Internet's Governance<br>
<a href="http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/</a><br>
Follow my Tweets:<br>
<a href="http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa</a><br>
MAG Interview:<br>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>