<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
I think this is helpful, and I am sorry that I missed the BestBits
meeting and all the discussion. My understanding (and I cc Jeanette
who was there and who was taking on the task for this letter, was
that discussion of evolution and strengthening was to go in the
other letter....because it was harder to get agreement on that. WE
are getting countries to sign on to extension of the mandate, which
is quite difficult. We cannot start throwing in qualitative
material that requires negotiation. <br>
Is this not why we have three letter going?<br>
Thanks <br>
Stephanie<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2014-09-03, 13:43, Anja Kovacs
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJqNAHCi_FMkzc54O7PBjz2BcwbtR0wUfTiZfG9_GVzRUAYesg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">Thanks, Lee. That was in fact also what was
suggested at the Best Bits meeting.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The unanimous support was not merely for establishing the
IGF as a permanent or long-term body, but for establishing it
as a permanent or long-term body while reforming and
strengthening it, and that is the language that the Best Bits
draft statement also uses at the moment (the cross-stakeholder
statement unfortunately does not). Transparency and
accountability for me are an integral part of what needs to be
strengthened, and I'm happy for that to be spelled out. I have
made a suggestion to that effect on the pad where the BB
statement is being drafted.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I wouldn't normally cross-post a message like this (on a BB
statement) to the IGC list, but I thought it is important that
since this conversation has now spread out over both lists,
people who are only part of the IGC should have the correct
background information as well.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks and best,</div>
<div>Anja </div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 3 September 2014 22:27, Lee W
McKnight <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:lmcknigh@syr.edu" target="_blank">lmcknigh@syr.edu</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">My cent:<br>
<br>
Split the difference.<br>
<br>
Everyone agrees/calls for a ten year planning horizon for UN
participation in IGF;<br>
<br>
coupled with a call for greater multistakeholder
participation in the -annual - review process for IGF
accountability and transparency reasons.<br>
<br>
Everyone's a winner.<br>
<br>
Lee<br>
<br>
<br>
________________________________________<br>
From: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>>
on behalf of George Sadowsky <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:george.sadowsky@gmail.com">george.sadowsky@gmail.com</a>><br>
Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2014 12:08 PM<br>
To: Civil IGC Society Internet Governance Caucus -; Milton L
Mueller<br>
Cc: Pranesh Prakash; Jeanette Hofmann; Best Bits<br>
Subject: Re: [governance] [bestbits] Call for making the IGF
permanent<br>
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5"><br>
I agree with Prakesh also.<br>
<br>
George<br>
<br>
<br>
On Sep 3, 2014, at 10:04 AM, Milton L Mueller <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu">mueller@syr.edu</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
><br>
><br>
>> -----Original Message-----<br>
>> I will have to be the one to provide that
"almost" to that unanimity.<br>
>> Speaking for myself, I do not support making
the IGF a permanent body.<br>
>><br>
>> The IGF has to be relevant and has to deliver
results, and we should push for<br>
>> accountability of the IGF. Making it permanent
isn't really going to help<br>
>> accountability of the IGF (just as having the
IANA contract be renewable has<br>
>> helped keep ICANN more accountable so far,
though the analogy is not perfect).<br>
>> I would support making the evaluation process
(for renewal of the IGF's term)<br>
>> more participative and transparent and, yes,
more "multistakeholder".<br>
><br>
> Agree with Pranash<br>
> --MM<br>
>
____________________________________________________________<br>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the
list:<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
> To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
><br>
> Translate this email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t"
target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.<br>
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits"
target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a><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 moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.internetdemocracy.in/" target="_blank">www.internetdemocracy.in</a><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>