<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 21/3/18 10:12 pm, Joly MacFie wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAM9VJk0SUK2SiD6Mkj+PQ5_pb4rwtUxqsr5TeO+r8+kX5sknjg@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Just to play
devil's advocate bit.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">As you may
know, I am a champion of remote participation. However, the
reasons that ICANN actually gave up on remote hubs, and at
ICANN61 readily reduced RP to audio stream and email at the
drop of an Adobe Connect flaw, should be contemplated. If not
handled well, remote participation can be disruptive, and
unsatisfactory to both local and remote participants. And
handling it well can be a big drain on resources. Some times
simpler solutions work, if not better, as well.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">I have
particular sympathy for those in Q&A queues who, having
perhaps traveled half way around the planet to attend, are
pre-empted by somebody at home, maybe still in their pajamas.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Years ago when I coordinated the Online Collaboration Dynamic
Coalition (it ended because of politics) we drew a distinction
between synchronous and asynchronous participation. The IGF's
biggest problem with remote participation is not the flaky streaming
software (which I can attest to), or the lack of consideration given
to timezones (which I can also attest to; this week's MAG meetings
were from 2am - 10am my local time), but the fact that asynchronous
participation (ie. participation that doesn't require you to be
online at the same time as everyone else) is given such a low
priority.<br>
<br>
Imagine the IGF as (a more civil, moderated, and outcome-oriented
version of) Reddit. Millions of Redditors around the world
participate in discussions and are able to collaborate together to
actually create useful things, which are an analogue of the
recommendations that the IGF could create, if it wanted to. For
example, this collaborative artwork was produced over a 72 hours
period by thousands of Redditors, who came online at different
points during that 72 hour period. The result is kind of chaotic,
definitely ridiculous, but it's a legitimate work of art:<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://sudoscript.com/reddit-place/">http://sudoscript.com/reddit-place/</a><br>
<br>
I'm not even a big Reddit fan or user, but imagine if the IGF could
do something similar, like a policy hackathon, that could produce
useful, tangible outputs in a relatively short period of time.
Unfortunately, this kind of participation is completely off the
IGF's agenda. During the entire MAG meeting that just ended, there
was zero time allotted to discussing possible new innovative
outcome-oriented processes, most time being devoted to existing,
conventional sessions such as workshops.<br>
<br>
I have been working on some ideas for a such processes that would
allow asynchronous online participation on an equal footing to
participation in person or via synchronous attendance at an IGF
meeting. There is still a prospect that something like this could be
piloted for 2018, but many MAG members, with their focus on workshop
selection and main topic themes, don't seem to be able to see the
forest for the trees. Workshops and (conventional) main sessions
should be 30% of what the IGF does, not 90%.<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Global Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://eff.org">https://eff.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jmalcolm@eff.org">jmalcolm@eff.org</a>
Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
Public key: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.eff.org/files/2016/11/27/key_jmalcolm.txt">https://www.eff.org/files/2016/11/27/key_jmalcolm.txt</a>
PGP fingerprint: 75D2 4C0D 35EA EA2F 8CA8 8F79 4911 EC4A EDDF 1122</pre>
</body>
</html>