<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000099">
<br>
<br>
Ginger Paque wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4BD0392B.4020602@gmail.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<font face="Verdana">Hi Parminder and all,<br>
Could we have ideas and positions on this possibility? From MAG members
and non-MAG members, please?<br>
</font></blockquote>
<br>
It is my opinion that if the IGF is at all to even attempt to address
half of its mandated tasks, which it has never addressed itself to -
like giving advise, recommendations, interacting with other
institutions etc - the only way to do so is to strengthen the MAG, and
structure it appropriately for these tasks. There is no other way -
an open house like the IGF cannot do these tasks on its own. That
is as clear as the daylight. MAG, or whatever name this core
multistakeholder group of the IGF takes, needs to have a central role
in addressing these parts of the mandate. <br>
<br>
This is why I have always considered any attempt at further diluting
the role and structure of the MAG as a strong move in a direction
exactly opposite to where we need to go, in fulfilling the mandate of
the IGF.<br>
<br>
The recent statement of G 77 and China at the UN Under Secretary
General's briefing on IGF review strongly makes this point on
strengthening the capacity of the IGF to perform its above mentioned
mandated tasks.<br>
<br>
It is easy to badmouth developing country governments with regard to
their stance on
many IG related issues, especially on their perceived lack of
enthusiasm for giving non-governmental groups a stronger role in IG
issues, but the silences of civil society groups on such very
legitimate
issues - whereby the IGF is not enabled to fulfil its mandate of
assisting in shaping global Internet policies - is heard loud and
clear. Do such silences not justify developing country's suspicion of
multistakeholder processes in IG? This of course is a deliberately
provocative poser. <br>
<br>
Are we ready to really get down to the task of examining the strongly
detrimental implications of the current vacuums in the global internet
policy regimes, especially for the marginalised people, groups and
countries? What can IGF do in this regard, and what was it expected to
do? What should be the role and structure of MAG to enable what the IGF
should ideally be able to do, and was mandated for it to do by the WSIS?<br>
<br>
<br>
Parminder <br>
<br>
PS: Another interesting issue to ponder upon; If developing countries
want the IGF - the only really multistakeholder body in IG arena -
to have a clearer role in global Internet policy arena - even if only
of advising, interacting with other organisation etc , while many
others (you know who)
are not too enthusiastic about such a role for the IGF, who is more
pro-multistakeholderism and who anti? <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4BD0392B.4020602@gmail.com" type="cite"><font
face="Verdana"> </font><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4BD0392B.4020602@gmail.com" type="cite"><font
face="Verdana"><br>
Thanks, gp<br>
</font><br>
On 4/22/2010 12:07 AM, Parminder wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4BCFD993.4070809@itforchange.net" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Ginger<br>
<br>
BTW, the MAG meeting on the 12th will consider/ assess MAG's own role
in the IGF's process. A statement for that can perhaps be attempted.
parminder <br>
</font><br>
Ginger Paque wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4BCF5025.3020003@gmail.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<font face="Verdana">Hi,<br>
<br>
My reference to the Geneva OC is for the Open Consultation planning
meetings for the IGF (Internet Governance Forum) 2010 in Vilnius. From
the IGF website:<br>
<br>
</font><strong>The Preparatory Process</strong>
The next meeting will be held as a planning meeting open to all
interested stakeholders and will take place on <strong>10-11 May 2010</strong>.
Meeting
schedule: 10-13 and 15-18 hours.<br>
Registration will be opened shortly. <br>
<br>
The planning meeting will be followed by a MAG meeting on <strong>12
May 2010</strong>.<br>
<br>
From: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/</a><br>
<br>
Best, Ginger<br>
<br>
On 4/21/2010 2:13 PM, Eric Dierker wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:752476.15005.qm@web83904.mail.sp1.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td
style="font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-size: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-size-adjust: inherit; font-stretch: inherit;"
valign="top">
<div>Ginger,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Please link us up to what you are talking about and
the
"request" "invitation" for such a statement. <br>
<br>
--- On <b>Wed, 4/21/10, Ginger Paque <i><a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:gpaque@gmail.com"><gpaque@gmail.com></a></i></b>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px;"><br>
From: Ginger Paque <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:gpaque@gmail.com"><gpaque@gmail.com></a><br>
Subject: [governance] OC meetings in Geneva May 10 and 11 IGC statement?<br>
To: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:%27governance@lists.cpsr.org%27">"'governance@lists.cpsr.org'"</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org"><governance@lists.cpsr.org></a><br>
Date: Wednesday, April 21, 2010, 2:38 PM<br>
<br>
<div id="yiv792276519"><font face="Verdana">Hi everyone,<br>
<br>
I expect to be at the Geneva OC meetings May 10th and 11th, to act as
onsite remote moderator (to present any substantive remote comments or
questions), and to represent the IGC.<br>
<br>
While discussions have moved forward on workshop proposals, I have not
seen any concrete suggestions for an IGC statement. Are there points
the IGC membership would like to make? Are there affiliated (IRP,
Gender, etc.) groups who are making statements that the IGC should
support? Supporting actions of our members is one function that we have
not exercised fully imho. However to do so, we need someone from the
group to ask for IGC support, and to have consensus from the list.<br>
<br>
As coordinators, Jeremy and I cannot take action for the IGC unless we
know what the members want done/said, so that we represent the members
of the IGC. <br>
<br>
Please let us know what you would like the IGC to 'do' at the upcoming
OC.<br>
<br>
Thanks! Regards, Ginger<br>
</font></div>
<br>
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----<br>
<br>
<div class="plainMail">____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://us.mc807.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance@lists.cpsr.org"
ymailto="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://us.mc807.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org"
ymailto="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a></div>
</blockquote>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>