In keeping with my 300 word proposal, here is a VERY brief (148 words) introductory summary. This could be followed by about 6 briefly stated points that make more specific recommendations.<div><br></div><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:#222222">"A policy foundation
has been laid for the implementation of remote participation (RP) as fully as
possible at the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) meetings, and some staff are hired
to facilitate. Also the Remote Participation Working Group RPWG) has been
working to make RP a reality. In spite of this RP falls [far] short of being
institutionalised.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:#222222"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:#222222">The
Internet Governance Caucus proposes that all actors should be assiduous in
facilitating this institutionalisation in whatever way possible.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:#222222"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:#222222">RP is
essential to enable the level of inclusion which is a basic principle of the
IGF. We need a balance between the both types of participations.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:#222222"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:#222222">We have the
slogan ‘One World, One Internet and Everyone Connected’, but in fact we can’t
assume to expect or provide the guaranteed same quality of service for everyone
and everywhere round the globe. However we have a responsibility to be as
inclusive as possible."</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:#222222"><br></span></p><div>Imran I think you make the most important point here <span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:#222222;background:aqua">We
need a balance between the both types of participations</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:#222222">. Last year the main theme for Nairobi included the word 'catalyst' - this year we need the word 'balance'.</span></div>
<div><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:#222222"><br></span></div><div><font color="#222222" face="Arial">I have attached a word file with the text included in this message.</font></div><div>
<font color="#222222" face="Arial"><br></font></div><div><font color="#222222" face="Arial">Deirdre<br></font><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 25 February 2012 08:34, Deirdre Williams <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:williams.deirdre@gmail.com">williams.deirdre@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">We have to find a way to separate the RP issue from the funding for physical presence issue.<div>They are DIFFERENT issues.</div>
<div>We should include acknowledgment of the RP work so far of the IGF secretariat.</div><div>
We should point to the work of the RPWG</div><div>We could point to the anomaly in logic of having meetings ABOUT the Internet without using the Internet as much as possible to extend the reach of the meeting.</div><div>
And we should try to do it all in 300 words or less so that the main thrust of our argument is unavoidably clear. There was a very concise proposal from the meetings last week.</div>
<div>Is this a reasonable approach?</div><div>Deirdre <div><div class="h5"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 25 February 2012 08:12, Imran Ahmed Shah <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ias_pk@yahoo.com" target="_blank">ias_pk@yahoo.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
Thanks Schombe for correction.<br>
<br>
You are right, these efforts were not made to eliminate the F2F.<br>
I think the sentence may be corrected as:<br>
<br>
". . . to eliminate the dependency of physical presence for a 'Face to Face' meeting by facilitating them . . ."<br>
<br>
Schombe I also agree and quoted that while advocating for the RP functionality (operational and technical), the provision for the physical participation as Face-to-Face meetings may not be eliminated. I also have quoted earlier that the travel support funding may be affected if the RP is supposed to the equal alternative for the F2F meetings.<br>
<br>
Thanks<br>
<br>
Imran<br>
------------------------------On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 3:48 PM PKT Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:>Thanks Schombe.>>On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 10:46 PM, Baudouin SCHOMBE <<a href="mailto:b.schombe@gmail.com" target="_blank">b.schombe@gmail.com</a>> wrote:>> I suggest replacing "eliminate" to "improve" to stay in a positive>> dimension.>>>> "Many people, working groups (as RPWG) and public and private organizations>> has worked extensively in the defense needs and development capabilities of>> law means and utilities to improve face to face meeting by facilitating them>> through different applications, while the focus of the meeting participants>> can obtain the presence of remote participants and / or individuals or>> groups can connect face to face with the participants in the meeting without>> missing the meeting so that 'they are not physically present at the>> meeting".>>>>>> SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN>>>> Téléphone mobile:<a href="tel:%2B243998983491" value="+243998983491" target="_blank">+243998983491</a>>> email : <a href="mailto:b.schombe@gmail.com" target="_blank">b.schombe@gmail.com</a>>> skype :<br>
b.schombe>> blog : <a href="http://akimambo.unblog.fr" target="_blank">http://akimambo.unblog.fr</a>>> Site Web : <a href="http://www.ticafrica.net" target="_blank">www.ticafrica.net</a>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2012/2/25 Baudouin SCHOMBE <<a href="mailto:b.schombe@gmail.com" target="_blank">b.schombe@gmail.com</a>>>>>>>>>> 2012/2/25 Imran Ahmed Shah <<a href="mailto:ias_pk@yahoo.com" target="_blank">ias_pk@yahoo.com</a>>>>>>> "Many of the individuals, working groups (like RPWG) and public and>>> private organizations has worked a lot in advocating the requirements and>>> functionalities development of the right means and utilities to eliminate>>> the face to face meeting by facilitating them through different>>> applications, whereas the focal point of the meeting participants may obtain>>> the presence of the remote participants and/or the individuals or groups may>>> get connected with the face to face meeting participants without missing the>>> meeting while they are not physically present in the meeting".>>>>>> Is what we discussed to eliminate face to face or are we looking for the>> solution approaches to allow more to participate in discussions<br>
on IGF from>> their location?>> I do not agree on the part highlighted in yellow.>>>> Baudouin>>>>>>>>-- >Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala>>Tweeter: @SalanietaT>Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro>Cell: <a href="tel:%2B679%20998%202851" value="+6799982851" target="_blank">+679 998 2851</a>><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div></div></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">-- <br>“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979<br>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979<br>
</div></div>