<!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="#000000">
<font face="Arial">Kati, if suggestions will come in on Twitter,
what hashtag should be used?</font><br>
<br>
On 5/13/2011 9:34 AM, Katitza Rodriguez wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4DCD415E.2000800@eff.org" type="cite">One more
thing: Ginger has kindly agreed to help MAGs members to summarize
any contribution that can arrive through twitter or in this list
even during the next OC and MAG meeting. At least for me, it is
quite important to have support from her. I am sure that she will
monitor the list and twitter, channelize their comments with calm
to MAGs members, and do a good job monitoring the list and
twitter.
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 5/13/11 7:24 AM, Katitza Rodriguez wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Hi there,
<br>
<br>
I haven't seen threats. I have seen lot of passionate people
trying to provide feedback in "real time"
<br>
during the MAG meeting to MAG members (and getting annoy if
someone A, B or C does not take into account that suggestion).
<br>
<br>
There are several problems.
<br>
<br>
a. Many non MAG members are learning about how the MAG meetings
works from the inside. Since all these are new tactics, many of
them are not aware of the dynamic or how civil society MAGs (at
least those who are active) coordinate, call for consensus,
among them, etc.
<br>
<br>
b. MAGs members has not been reaching out to members to collect
feedback. Therefore all the feedback come in during the meeting.
This was my experience the last meeting that I wasn't able to
attend (due to lack of funding) but join the discussion online.
I observed how the dynamics played, and how people start arguing
among themselves instead of focusing on the meeting (using very
high-tone/passionate words).
<br>
<br>
c. I do believe that if we want to improve our self as a group,
MAGs members need to reach out to IGC members before the
meeting. Get all the feedback as much as we can. Sort out
difference before the meeting as much as we can.
<br>
<br>
d. MAGs members should prepare and read all the materials that
will be part of the discussion during the meeting. Observers
(who will be in Geneva) should do the same so everyone should
start with the same knowledge and we can build upon it. meetings
are quite quickly.
<br>
<br>
IMPORTANT: Please IGC members should review NOW the main IGC
program, see if they like how the main themes are structure (ie:
Is people OK with the Development session, one of the most
controversial main sessions in the program). Do IGC members have
any suggestion? Is there any special point we should bring into
the table? Should we fight for observers to speak in the
meeting? What happen if there are more observers from the
business sector than civil society? By doing so: Do we break the
weak balance we have among civil society reps, business sector,
technical community on the MAG?
<br>
<br>
Let's focus on the next week meeting so we can sort out our
difference as much as we can before the meeting.
<br>
<br>
That is my suggestion, Katitza
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 5/13/11 5:30 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">More important, it would be good to know
of the nature of the threats you experienced during the MAG
meetings.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>