<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Saturday 04 May 2013 07:34 PM, Avri
Doria wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:f7ad92e5-9c78-44de-8fbd-357c94fae399@email.android.com"
type="cite">Update:<br>
<br>
It does seen, if i understand correctly, that at last the first
meeting will be closed to all but members. I think this an
unfortunate mistake, but I do not know how to change that just
yet.<br>
<br>
So my first cause in this WGEC is to argue for opening all
meetings, including this first one, at least to the same extent
that the organizations with which enhanced cooperation is desired
open their meetings. At the very least I will be arguing that all
meetings, including the first, have live streaming and that all
email lists have open archives.<br>
<br>
I hope others will join me in this attempt, but I am not assuming
that just because we come from civil society or even may have been
put forward by the same groups, that we will have any notion of a
common front. I understand that we come from diverse stands of
civil society and that we advocate differently for a variety of
goals.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Sunshine rules, or maximum openness, should apply to all public
processes by default, unless a compelling case can be made to the
contrary. I agree WG (working group on enhanced cooperation) meeting
should be open. If we want to write something on it to the chair we
can...<br>
<br>
Need for openness and sunshine rules also extend to other public
processes associated with the WG, for instance of selecting its
members, by all stakeholders. I also demand full openness on that,
which has not been forthcoming. <br>
<br>
Can we also write to the chair seeking that all selection process
holders publish the respective process of selection. To remind
again, such publishing is required for MAG selections as per the
recent report of the WG on improvements to the IGF. I dont see why
should it then not be required for stakeholder rep selection process
for other UN related groups./ committees. <br>
<br>
I am not insisting that we make the two demands together in a single
representation, We can do it separately.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
PS: We also need to write to UNDESA and IGF secretariat reminding
them that the report of WG on IGF improvements requires that all
stakeholder processes recommending reps for the MAG as well as the
overall process be published. We havent seen it for the last round
of MAG selections which happened after the UN Assembly had adopted
the report. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:f7ad92e5-9c78-44de-8fbd-357c94fae399@email.android.com"
type="cite"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">Avri Doria <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:avri@acm.org"><avri@acm.org></a>
wrote:
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);
padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre style="white-space: pre-wrap; word-wrap:break-word; font-family: sans-serif; margin-top: 0px">Hi,
Joy, thanks for sending this to the caucus.
For myself, once I understand what all we are up to in the WG, I plan to communicate with the IGC and others doing periodic reporting in and request for feedback. At this point I am just waiting until it gets underway. Other than the fact that there is a first meeting 30-31 May, there isn't much I know.
For example I am still hoping for an open meeting, at least to the extent of streaming audio. But I do not know what the plans are, having heard no formal plans on that sort of thing. I have heard it rumored that the first meeting may be closed until such time as it decides to be open (ala MAG model?), but I don't really have any definitive info. I have sent in a question.
Now back to planning for WTPF, WSIS, IGF and workshops.
joy <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:joy@apc.org"><joy@apc.org></a> wrote:
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi all
I am sharing the invitation to Working Group members (message below)
which includes details about the upcoming first meeting of the working
group on 30-31 May in Geneva (and apologies for any cross postings). I
do not yet know what the format of the meeting will be and only have a
very broad outline of the working methods.
Probably of most substantive interest is the the proposed discussion on
the themes for the groups mandate, on which a questionnairre and survey
will be developed as the work rolls out this year and early next - for
ease of reference I have posted this list inline below. Note that this
list is simply a redaction of previous discussions and has been
developed as a summary of points raised in 2012 meetings. I can't
vouch
for its accuracy.
With other deadlines this week (IGF workshops, WSIS, WTPF, etc) civil
society participants have not yet been focussing on this upcoming
meeting yet, but of course, please do share your comments and ideas in
the coming weeks.
Kind regards
Joy Liddicoat</blockquote>
Avri Doria
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
~~~<br>
avri </blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>