<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Jan 16, 2013, at 11:46 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <<a href="mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com">salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><div class="im"><blockquote type="cite"><font face="Verdana">
<br>
BTW, there was a rather controversial meeting of the MAG during
the IGF Baku. Much less have a report from it from MAG's CS
members, most people even do not know that such a meeting took
place, and that it was rather controversial n many aspects.</font><br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Izumi did report it.<br></div></blockquote><div><br>Yes, Izumi has consistently been reporting all the meetings that he attends to the IGC. MAG meetings included. </div></div></blockquote><br></div><div>Yes, given that he was co-coordinator of the caucus and seemed to enjoy providing ample reportage, I think the MAG CS members sort of deferred to Izumi's reporting and thought he had this function covered. But if people feel they'd like more reportage the MAG CS members can figure out an approach, whether multiple individual reports in parallel or consolidated.</div><div><br></div><div>BTW Parminder, what did you think was so controversial about the non-official MAG gathering in Baku? It didn't take any decisions, people were acutely aware that we couldn't. It was an exchange of views with the intention of stimulating some re-engagement that could feed back into the larger group….</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div><br></div><div>BIll</div><div><br></div></body></html>