<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">Apologies for being late into this important
discussion.<br>
<br>
I will comment separately on the discussions that have taken place
upto now and the evolving text. However, I think we should first
of all seek that MAG implements the recommendations of the WG on
IGF Improvements, especially on the following counts<br>
(below are all quotes from the WG's report)</font><br>
<font face="Verdana">
<meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</font>
<p style="margin-left: 2cm; margin-right: 2cm" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 11pt" size="2"><span lang="en-US">"To
focus discussions, the preparation process of each IGF should
formulate a set of policy questions to be considered at the
IGF, as
part of the overall discussion. The results of the debates of
these
questions, with special focus on public policy perspectives
and aimed
at capacity building, should be stated in the outcome
documentation."</span></font></p>
<p style="margin-left: 2cm; margin-right: 2cm" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 11pt" size="2"><span lang="en-US">"The
outcome documentation should include messages that map out
converging
and diverging opinions on given questions."<br>
</span></font></p>
<p style="margin-left: 2cm; margin-right: 2cm" align="JUSTIFY">
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="LibreOffice 3.5 (Linux)">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm }
P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm }
-->
</style>
<p style="margin-right: 2cm" align="JUSTIFY">"…<font
style="font-size: 11pt" size="2"><span lang="en-US">...identifying
pertinent
key policy questions around which main sessions for the IGF
will be structured. In order to enhance the bottom-up
process and to
facilitate the identification of key policy questions, the
Secretariat could also issue the call for workshop proposals
before
the first Open Consultation."</span></font></p>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 2cm; margin-right: 2cm" align="JUSTIFY">
<meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 2cm; margin-right: 2cm" align="JUSTIFY">
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="LibreOffice 3.5 (Linux)">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm }
P { margin-bottom: 0cm; direction: ltr; color: #000000; line-height: 0.42cm; widows: 2; orphans: 2 }
P.western { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 10pt; so-language: en-GB }
P.cjk { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 10pt }
P.ctl { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 10pt; so-language: ar-SA }
A:link { color: #0000ff }
A:visited { color: #800080 }
A.western:visited { so-language: en-IN }
A.cjk:visited { so-language: zh-CN }
A.ctl:visited { so-language: hi-IN }
A.sdfootnotesym-western { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 9pt }
A.sdfootnotesym-cjk { font-size: 9pt }
A.sdfootnotesym-ctl { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif }
A.sdendnotesym-western { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 9pt }
A.sdendnotesym-cjk { font-size: 9pt }
A.sdendnotesym-ctl { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif }
-->
</style>
</p>
(quotes end)<br>
<br>
There has been a sense of impatience and great urgency vis a vis
the fact that IGF has really not addressed key global public policy
questions that it was created to contribute towards resolution of.
For tooo long it has remained caught in matters of process and form.
It is time to do what it really needed to do.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<font color="#000000"><font face="Courier, Courier New, monospace">
</font></font>
<p style="margin-left: 2cm; margin-right: 2cm" align="JUSTIFY">
</p>
<font face="Verdana">
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="LibreOffice 3.5 (Linux)">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm }
P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm }
-->
</style><br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Friday 01 February 2013 09:12 PM,
Norbert Bollow wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:20130201164241.6caaa7d2@quill.bollow.ch"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Louis Pouzin <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pouzin@well.com"><pouzin@well.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 7:13 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="">Louis Pouzin <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pouzin@well.com"><pouzin@well.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">re Main sessions.
*Only two *90min main sessions.
One on the 1st day, the other on the last day.
Interpretation only in english.
Reallocate interpreters to most popular workshops
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Do you think that severely reducing the weight of the main sessions
like this is preferable to the suggestion of innovation in main
session format (as currently in the draft submission [1])?
[1] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79">http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79</a>
If so, why?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Yes Norbert.
Main sessions are customarily preempted as show business for local
celebrities and IGF nomenklatura. That produces repetitious hackneyed
truisms inducing boredom and sleep. A fair number of attendees come
because there is interpretation in several languages. Two sessions of
that sort are enough for speakers' ego satisfaction.
One more main session could be tried as innovation, whatever that
means. Result will tell.
Workshops are more effective because:
- there is much more choice, one can move from a poor one to a good
one,
- speakers use spontaneous language,
- there are more interactions with the attendees,
- specific topics fit better with a small room,
- it's easier to identify who is there.
On the minus side, there is no interpretation, or rarely. Speakers'
english is more or less understandable, depending on the room. This
could be corrected by "repeaters", that is people trained to decode
various english accents, and repeat verbatim in well spoken american
(Chicagoan).
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Louis, thanks a lot for explaining. I think that you are definitely
making a valid point. On the other hand, I don't think that we should
give up on trying to fix the main sessions. If the IGF evolves into
just a heap of workshops plus a bit of "show business" at the beginning
and end, we'll have lost the battle of building the IGF into something
that is truly taken seriously.
So far it seems to me that significantly more of the contributors to
the statement agree with the view that we should emphasize the need
for call of innovation of main sessions rather than to get rid of most
of them.
So right now it seems to me appropriate not to act on this change
request.
What do the others think?
Greetings,
Norbert
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>