Dear all,<div><br></div><div>I agree with Avri that we should let many flowers bloom. However, at the same time I am not convinced that having a workshop on this topic at the IGF is the best way forward. For one thing, even if the MAG might be willing to let go of the requirement that each workshop has at least three stakeholder groups, I think we should be careful not to slowly do away with what is perhaps the most valuable characteristic of the IGF, the dialogue across stakeholder groups, by focusing our efforts at the IGF on having discussions that are really internal to civil society. </div>
<div><br></div><div>I am also not sure that we can actually afford to wait until October to have this conversation among ourselves. Questions around legitimacy, representation, accountability, transparency crop up again and again, not only at the global level but at national levels as well, and have done so for years. Why don't we start trying to tackle these questions in a more systematic manner now?<div>
<div><br></div><div>So here is what I would like to suggest. In an attempt to start moving forward on these issues, why don't we start discussing one question a week on a separate email thread, say from early April onwards? The conversation could then be summarised by one person in the following week, highlighting points of agreement, but also of convergence. If people find this useful, the document in question could each time be put to a consensus call, to make sure that all those involved do indeed feel it is representative of the discussion. </div>
<div><br></div><div>When all questions have been covered, the summaries could all be put together into one outcome document, that can highlight recommendations and principles wherever agreement has been reached. As people's opinions might change, or crystalise, as the discussions evolve, the document as a whole probably should also be put up for discussion for a week, and be amended according to the outcome of that conversation.</div>
<div><br></div><div>At the IGF itself, we could then have a half day IGF pre-event, where we discuss the document and its implications with civil society beyond the IGC, as well as think through how and where our conversations on this topic can usefully feed into the many workshops on multistakeholderism that will undoubtedly take place at the IGF this year. </div>
<div><br></div><div>The questions we would address is first of all the set already shared by Nnenna, but also the questions that Michael posed in an earlier email - as the latter were buried somewhere in a long thread, I have pasted them again below this message. We made want to add additional questions as well.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I would be very interested in hearing what you think of this proposal. If people think this is a good idea, I would be happy to put in the work to put this on the rails. If enough people are interested, perhaps we could even put into place a small group to take charge of this mini-project.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Best regards,</div><div>Anja</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><u>Michael's questions:</u><br><div><br></div><div><div><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"> 1. what is the definition of a "stakeholder" (stakeholder group?--is</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">there a difference?)</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"> 2. who gets to define/ratify the</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">definitions/inclusionary/</span><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">exclusionary covenants for individual</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">stakeholders/SG's</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"> 3. is there an appeal/review process re: these covenants</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"> 4. what is the process of evolution/change of these stakeholder</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">covenants and how is the process governed/managed and by whom</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"> 5. how are internal governance process within stakeholder groups</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">determined/ratified and how is this process itself governed and by whom</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"> 6. what is the relationship between individual stakeholder groups</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">and associated organizational (focal) structures--is this a necessary or</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">contingent relationship and if contingent what are the factors governing</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">such contingencies</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"> 7. what is the relationship between SG's, Focal organizations and</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">non-Focal SG members--and how is this governed and by whom</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"> 8. how is the significant disparity in available resources for</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">internal operations/management and external participation/representation</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">handled so as to ensure some degree of equitable opportunity for the various</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">stakeholders</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"> 9. other...</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,204);color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Mike</span><br style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif">
<div style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-size:13px;font-family:arial,sans-serif"><div style="margin:5px 0px"><div style="color:rgb(80,0,80);font-size:11px;background-color:rgb(241,241,241);border:1px solid rgb(221,221,221);clear:both;line-height:6px;outline:none;width:20px">
</div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 22 March 2013 21:58, Avri Doria <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org" target="_blank">avri@acm.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><br><div><div><div>On 22 Mar 2013, at 11:43, Adam Peake wrote:</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Norbert Bollow <<a href="mailto:nb@bollow.ch" target="_blank">nb@bollow.ch</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">[with IGC coordinator hat on]<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">In any case, if the idea is to go forward, in whatever way, it will<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">
need a volunteer to move it forward.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">BTW "there should be fewer workshops" has *not* been adopted as an<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">
IGC consensus position. The thought was included in the recent IGC<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">statement, but only with a "Some of us suggest:" qualifier, because<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">
it did not get consensus otherwise.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><br><br>OK, could you check. I don't remember anyone saying more workshops<br>better, perhaps one saying it wasn't an issue, and quite a number<br>
saying less would be good (one way or another saying a drop in numbers<br>would be good).<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div>I do. I like there being a lot of diversity in the workshop offerings. I think a better job should be done of threading them so that like does not compete with like in the same time slot.</div>
<div><br></div><div>But I do beleive that in any of the themes one should be able to attend something in that theme in most every time slot if that is ones pleasure or need.</div><div><br></div><div>I also have no problem with workshops that have too few attendees. Both on the IGF were I participated in a workshop with fewer than 10 people came, and at recent ILGA world conference where only 3 people came to a session i was giving, we had a great session. And since the IGF allows us to capture the sound and transcript of every workshop no matter how sparsely attended, they are all available to all of us and to all stakeholders, no matter how few people attend initially.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I think that we only bring this group together once a year on a global level and we should allow for all the conversations possible, even if it is only among a handful of people who would not share otherwise on this topic.</div>
<div><br></div><div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>it does matter. Seems one of the reasons for this preliminary<br>proposal process is to try and reduce the number of workshops, to<br>reduce duplicates on the same topic, and to make the barrier a bit<br>
higher for frequent contributors. If there really isn't consensus<br>that the number of workshops should be reduced this year (there were<br>11 parallel tracks in Baku) then CS MAG members might like to know<br>that's the prevailing view.<br>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div></div>As I said I have a dissenting view. I think the more MAG pares things down, the more they reduce the information that will be shared and the more they curtail the opportunities for capacity building. I also think it is a waste of their time, they have more important issues to work on that the endless haggle over workshops.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I do agree with those who say we should have more free time, although I think free time is largely found by skipping sessions for other activities from time to time. I also think that there should be decent free time intervals between sessions to allow chat time at the end of a workshop. Unless food is being offered by the host, I would prefer a schedule that ran through the day of (90 minute sessions followed by 30 minute breaks from 8am tile 8pm with not specific feeding time. We travel far for the opportunity to meet, so lets meet as much as possible while at the meeting. People don't need to go to all meetings, but all meetings need to be held. Sell sandwiches the hungry can bring to the sessions or sit in a nice environment and char over. Wasting a workshop time slot with lunch makes no sense to me - unless of course it is a cultural affair where the hosts treats the assembled.<br>
</div><div><br></div><div>avri</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://ilga.org/" target="_blank">ILGA</a> - International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association: a worldwide federation campaigning for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex rights, since 1978.</div>
<div><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/magabout" target="_blank">MAG</a> - Multistakeholder Advisory Group</div></div><br>____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org" target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
<a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Dr. Anja Kovacs<br>The Internet Democracy Project<br><br>+91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs<br><a href="http://www.internetdemocracy.in/" target="_blank">www.internetdemocracy.in</a><br>
</div></div>
</div></div></div>