<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">I may also remind that I had proposed that IGC
supports the Internet Rights and Principles (IRP) Group which is
likely to propose that <br>
<br>
(1) Internet</font> principles in some form be the overall theme
of the next IGF - Maybe something more descriptive as - 'public
interest principles for the Internet' or 'Shaping global principles
for the Internet'<br>
<br>
(2) A round table on Internet Principles be held at the next IGF. <br>
<br>
I am developing a first draft for the IRP Group, if IGC so wants I
can share it with IGC as well.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Sunday 27 January 2013 04:46 PM,
Adam Peake wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAFabd1K3LNvcTcyouYSeuxmp_=+fKs=_CSoaisTQThX53X5UGw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi Norbert,
No, sorry, no time to work on a draft. But look forward to discussion
and hopefully some consensus.
Adam
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Norbert Bollow <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:nb@bollow.ch"><nb@bollow.ch></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">[with IGC Coordinator hat on]
Adam Peake <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp"><ajp@glocom.ac.jp></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Resending email sent to the list on Jan 10. Deadline for
contributions is Feb 14.
Just over two weeks to agree any contribution.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Thanks for reminding us! This is urgent and imporant.
Adam, are you willing and able to take the time to quickly produce a
first draft?
Greetings,
Norbert
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">A few comments for the February/March consultation.
Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a
year.
Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. Make this target
number known when the call for applications is published, might be the
first time quite a large number of proposals are rejected (might think
about implications of this for the IGF), people should expect to be
disappointed.
Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all
workshops.
Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition,
etc.)
No reason an initial call to prepare proposals can't be made before
the Feb meeting (more time better and the meetings a little later than
usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready their stakeholders.
For workshops, keep the current themes (access, SOP
[security/openness/privacy], IG4D [Internet governance for
development], CIR [critical Internet resources], emerging issues).
Have the MAG better define Internet Governance, how it must be
considered in workshop proposals (there are other spaces in WSIS
follow-up for non-IG issues). Use an evaluation form for workshops
(at the moment don't even know if a room was empty or overflowing,
simple count a good idea.) However, indications are that while there
were too many workshops in Baku many were strong in content, well
received. MAG should not cut what looks like a success to favor the
floundering main sessions.
Merging not the always the solution, it's too easy an answer for MAG
in their evaluation to say merge simply because proposals have similar
words in the title. If merging proposed then the new workshop needs
support or tendency to end up with 2 workshops in the same space
(merge in name only).
Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- meaningful
participation of developing countries in Internet governance".
Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours generally too long, some
poorly attended in Baku and many grumbled complaints about poor
content, poor preparation, repeating issues from previous years, etc.
Some main sessions need better preparation (and some were good -
transcripts illustrate the differences, MAG needs to be aware they
have a role to complete, not last minute for a meeting of the IGF's
importance.) Invite speakers early. Use (look for) funds to support
speakers.
Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two sessions, then
justifies 3 hours. Probably best held on the final morning (i.e.
emerging issues become issues the IGF thinks emerging as important for
the coming year(s)).
Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by closing.
Critical Internet Resources (strong session in Baku, justifies 3
hours). Keep as before.
New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in mixed formats over 1 day,
e.g. Morning expert panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long break
where people encouraged to join self-organizing small groups to
discuss a few set questions and ideas from the morning panel.
Afternoon, 2 hour moderated session with audience only, no
panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the small groups.
New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps same format as
suggested for enhanced cooperation. Try something different.
Development aspect of IG always overlooked and too often "governance"
lost as discussion focuses on IT for development. Open specific
public comment on design/scope of IG4D session. Bring back to the May
meeting to decide on topics and format.
Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but keep as workshops
and perhaps round-tables.
Adam
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>