<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font face="Verdana">Dear Sheetal/ All</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Some clarifications</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">I knew there was a conversation taking place
among BestBits members. IT for Change has been a founding member
of BB but latter withdraw form this designation (for reasons I
am ready to share if needed) and continued as ordinary
participants. I deliberately stayed out of the BB conversation
on shutting shop, joining IGC, what thereupon, and so on. I
wanted those more closely involved to decide. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">At some times there were conversations/ call
that involved some IGC members as well, especially IGC
co-ordinators... I was unclear about what this meant, but they
appeared harmless, possibly involving clarifications about
joining IGC (for those, likely few, BB members who were not
already in the IGC). I watched it out of the corner of my eye,
expecting that anything really important requiring IGC
membership's attention will specifically be brought to our
notice by co-coordinators. Since nothing really much ever was, I
felt things were going fine. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Even when I felt things were less clear then
they could be, I did not step in becuase I did not want in any
way to muddy waters if BB people wanted it to fold it up into
the IGC. They were indeed welcome to do it. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Going further, I can even well understand
and appreciate that, following such a deliberate step, it is
quite possible that some of these new (or old ones from BB)
members of IGC would, in time, like to get something moving
within the IGC. That would be a legitimate aspiration, of any
member of IGC, or a group of them. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Now, all this is quite well. But I could not
stop myself when I read that report from Arsene from their ICANN
meeting, about elections being held after charter amendment,
combined lists of IGC and BB, and so on, and also when no one
else, either Bruno, or any other member of the 'calls group'
said anything to the contradict Arsene's report. Do you think it
was misplaced for me to speak up at this stage ? (why I did not
speak earlier is already clarified above).</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Is it wrong to ask questions like; who is
asking for charter amendment, why, what are the key objectives,
what exactly has been found amiss with the existing charter, and
so on? Do not the concerned people </font><font face="Verdana">have
a responsibility to respond to this? I</font><font
face="Verdana">'d call them the 'calls group' because it is
unclear which part was BB process, and which some kind of
combined process, and the latter with what IGC authorisation,
etc...<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">And is it wrong to jump up when there was
this entirely gratuitous offer made of self-appointment to a
'leadership group', and then also including along a colleague
(from the same 'calls group', which tentative term has no
pejorative sense here -- i just use it bec I am -- and many
others are -- unclear whether it was an internal BB process, and
if not what process really it was ) . What leadership group of
IGC!? What process is/ was that??? Do we still just sit back and
not comment and question?</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">regards</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Parminder <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana"></font><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 18/07/19 3:13 PM, Sheetal Kumar
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAK78muQeWtYVFxB8z74BnYkM91w8Q0=fq4=Zv-ZaqMZ7j4QKDg@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Dear Parminder, all, <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As you and others have pointed out, the conversation about
closing Bestbits and requesting any members there who are not
already on IGC to join IGC (aka 'merger' to some) has been
ongoing for months. The information has been continually
shared on both this list/among this community and on the
Bestbits list. Anyway, we could have done more to reach out to
key people and communicated things more clearly perhaps.
That's something I've learned. We did try but we can always do
more to communicate better. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There are just a few things which Parminder you've asked
clarity on, and what follows is my reading of things as
someone who has been part of the relevant discussions from the
beginning so I do hope I'm not misrepresenting anything. As
Farzaneh was doing earlier, I think it's worth identifying
what we agree on and then work through what we disagree on.<br>
</div>
<div>
<p><i> If there is anything more? If so, everyone involved,
please state it out here, explicitly, on the IGC's primary
working space. Why are we going in so many circles about
it?</i></p>
<p><i>
</i></p>
<p><i>What process is being disregarded, the one about which
yesterday Arsene reported that it was decided that
elections will be held after (1) the IGC charter is
amended (and I have been asking what is this, who
triggered this demand, with what objectives, what
justifications, and so on, and people simply refuse to
answer), and (2) when their is a combined list (sorry, IGC
is not a list, one has to individually take its membership
with an explicit individual-based process, there is no
merging or combining lists here) .</i></p>
<p>All that has been discussed, on both IGC and Bestbits
lists, including by active, long-standing and even founding
members of both, has been how to reinvigorate civil society
coordination. It was agreed by those taking part in these
discussions which have been open to everyone from the start
(there is a whole archive of the discussions that have been
continually shared on here and on Bestbits, including <a
href="https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture"
moz-do-not-send="true">in the etherpad here</a>), that the
existence of both Bestbits and IGC wasn't helping so
Bestbits should close. As we are all sticklers for process
(a good thing, in my opinion), this could not simply be a
matter of closing the list and telling everyone to move off
onto another (IGC) if they weren't already members. As I
mentioned before, Bestbits was more than a list too.
Instead, we had conversations about it, that lasted months.
Some people even wanted to create a new group. We decided
not to. Among some suggestions that came out of these
conversations was the opportunity to revise the IGC charter.
Founding IGC members were part of this discussion, nothing,
and I repeat, nothing was decided or agreed in that regard.
Indeed it would be bizarre for that to happen. Any such
process would have to respect the IGC charter and involve
all members. Of course. Anything that has been shared which
says otherwise are simply unfortunate misunderstandings, and
we should move on. There are no reverse takeovers taking
place, no desire to rip apart the Charter. Respect for
process is key. There is no self-appointed leadership from
what I can see, just people trying to steer things towards
more unity and less fracture. <br>
</p>
<p><i>
Any newcomer needs just 2 months of membership to vote..
No one really is insisting that we hold elections like
today . But this certainly cannot be the reason for a
process that you / Sheetal are saying has been on for more
than 6 months now. That would be so very illogical,
no..... Is just the issue of eligibility for voting
stopping the process, but why labour it over 7 months when
it needs just 2 months cooling period? -- Although it does
make me wonder, and I repeat, why such a strong focus on
the coordinator election!! IGC is much more than that...
Why such insistence!!? What does one read into it. <br>
</i></p>
<p>It may seem bizarre, but honestly, it just took ages for
those in the discussions which have been open to everyone
since the beginning to decide to close Bestbits as a
'solution' to a lack of civil society coordination. There
were other proposals like I said, including setting up a new
group. So here we are. 7 months later, with agreement to
close Bestbits and not create a new list or do something
else. IGC is more than a list, sure, but because leadership
is I guess key to reinvigorating things, elections are seen
as a way to start.<br>
</p>
<p>Also, others have asked 'how many people are on Bestbits'
that are not on IGC? Honestly, I don't know. Maybe its 2,
maybe its 20. My reasoning is that even if one or two of
those people join and have the energy and commitment to run
for elections and coordinate going forward, we should wait
for them to join. Do we have much to lose? David and
Jeanette have pointed out that we could wait for an
indefinite period of time and it would just be a for a
handful of people to join. That is true, so we could
undertake an exercise comparing who is not on both lists and
reach out to them directly. Alternatively, we are planning
to have a call in w/c August 05 (I will send the details
soon) and we can collectively set a date then for the
closure of Bestbits, requesting those not already on IGC to
join. And then we'll be all having this conversation on this
list, including new members. Once new BB members have joined
(even if its just 2-3 people) we can then decide whether to
hold elections right away or wait 2 months. Maybe everyone
will want to just hold elections right away, including the
handful of new members. Or maybe they'll want to wait. Also,
we can discuss the day 0 event together. If we don't do the
closure properly then we risk relevant and interested people
losing out on the opportunity to discuss these things. <br>
</p>
<p>So, can we agree that we set a date and time by which
members of Bestbits who are not members of IGC join IGC and
then we set an agenda, and have a conversation about when to
hold elections etc etc?<br>
</p>
<p>Also, btw the day 0 event is from 16h00-18h00 in Room X. </p>
<p>Best</p>
<p>Sheetal<br>
</p>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 at 09:35,
parminder <<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"
moz-do-not-send="true">parminder@itforchange.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="gmail-m_-1839724901850448854moz-cite-prefix">On
17/07/19 11:02 PM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"> What Sheetal says below is correct
in my opinion. We are in fact trying to merge BB and IGC.
</blockquote>
<p>Only loosely speaking, formally from IGC point of view,
there is no merging happening... Some new people want to
join IGC, and if conditions are fulfilled they are indeed
welcome.</p>
<p> If there is anything more? If so, everyone involved,
please state it out here, explicitly, on the IGC's primary
working space. Why are we going in so many circles about
it?</p>
<p>Lately, two specific, and what I consider minor, issues
have been stated. <br>
</p>
<p>1. Can enough time be given to elections so that the new
members can go through their 2 month cooling period.... I
said that can be done, and there has been no major
opposition to it (Although, frankly, if you ask me, I
really do not understand why this hurry and absolute
insistence on voting right away . That should not be such
a big thing. Cooling periods are there for a reason.
People who havent ever been on the IGC need to observe,
see and know and mingle before insisting on some absolute
rights to vote for their choice of coordinator. So, why,
really this insistence ? What is the plan? But anyway, I
really said I am fine either way.)<br>
</p>
<p>2. What to do with BB's web archives, and again there is
not much problem with it. Whenever we have a working IGC
website, we can put them somewhere on it, no problem.</p>
<p>What else? Is there anything more? Why dont people tell
us clearly, rather than going in circles and creating so
much confusion. <br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite">We are trying to create a more
unified civil society presence. We don’t do that by
throwing up procedural walls around this group.</blockquote>
<p>Can you be explicit? what procedural walls are blocking
BB people -- other than those who already are there-- from
joining IGC, ?<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"> Face facts, IGC needs the people
from BB just as much as they need us. It is destructive,
as Sheetal says, to disregard the process we have been
going through to bring things back together. </blockquote>
<p>What process is being disregarded, the one about which
yesterday Arsene reported that it was decided that
elections will be held after (1) the IGC charter is
amended (and I have been asking what is this, who
triggered this demand, with what objectives, what
justifications, and so on, and people simply refuse to
answer), and (2) when their is a combined list (sorry, IGC
is not a list, one has to individually take its membership
with an explicit individual-based process, there is no
merging or combining lists here) .</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"> I hope I don’t need to remind
people why a significant chunk of civil society broke off
from IGC to begin with - but it looks like certain actors
are doing the reminding for me. </blockquote>
<p>Sure, Milton, since you are now going towards a
confrontational abyss, please do remind us. (Btw, I was
among the founding members of BB, and I remember you
werent around that much in those discussions). In fact
any coming back of BB member to IGC -- if you really think
so --should perhaps be helped by visiting the original
conditions of why they went away and so on... We are
capable of an adult conversation here, and should not be
afraid. Important public facts are always good to know and
discuss. And then one may also discuss what happened with
BB, whether they were able to achieve the objectives they
set themselves for, if not, why, and what are the reasons
of BB's dissolution and coming back to an IGC, which
admittedly is far weaker and lost now than when they left
it. <br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It is exclusionary to hold elections now, before
the newcomers can vote. Can someone tell me what
positive goal is achieved by doing that? Can someone
tell me what is lost if we don’t hold elections? </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Any newcomer needs just 2 months of membership to vote..
No one really is insisting that we hold elections like
today . But this certainly cannot be the reason for a
process that you / Sheetal are saying has been on for more
than 6 months now. That would be so very illogical,
no..... Is just the issue of eligibility for voting
stopping the process, but why labour it over 7 months when
it needs just 2 months cooling period? -- Although it does
make me wonder, and I repeat, why such a strong focus on
the coordinator election!! IGC is much more than that...
Why such insistence!!? What does one read into it. <br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>Do some people like for IGC to be a small and
hostile place where they can be a big fish in a small
pond? I hope not. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>(Just to match) Or are some people planning to make IGC
their private pond. I hope not. <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>parminder <br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div><br>
<div
id="gmail-m_-1839724901850448854AppleMailSignature"
dir="ltr">Milton L Mueller
<div>Professor, School of Public Policy</div>
<div>Georgia Institute of Technology</div>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
On Jul 17, 2019, at 14:07, Sheetal Kumar <<a
href="mailto:sheetal@gp-digital.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">sheetal@gp-digital.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Dear all, <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I agree that it is easy to join IGC if you
sign up to the Charter. It's indeed pretty
straightforward. However, what I don't
understand is the disregard for a process that
has been ongoing for months, about a large and
until recently active splinter group of IGC
(namely, Bestbits) which has since agreed to
close and its members who are not already part
of IGC 'join IGC'. Bestbits was not just a
mailing list, it had an active membership, it
had a functioning website, it had a steering
group, it used to coordinate, and more. It
also had its own membership of the CSCG and
used to convene an event before the global
IGF. And now it is closing. Who knows how many
people who have been part of that discussion
or at least following on Bestbits who are not
on IGC would like to be part of the IGC
elections? Whether its semantic or not to call
it a 'merger', the point remains that this has
been a discussion for a few months that
should, IMHO, have an impact on when to hold
the IGC elections. They don't have to, but I
think it makes sense for them to considering
the history of IGC and Bestbits (as a splinter
group of IGC). Also, I'm not saying this
because I want to run for any elections
necessarily, I've only ever been interested a
discussion towards a more impactful and
coordinated civil society in this space. It
just seems to make sense not to disregard that
Bestbits discussion and to take decisions with
the Bestbits discussion in mind (again,
because of the history of the connection
between Bestbits and IGC).<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I've looked at the IGC Charter and it says
"Voting process: Each person who is subscribed
to the list at least two (2) months before the
election will be given a voter account". <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So, even if Bestbits members who are not
part of IGC joined then they couldn't vote
right away. Shouldn't we wait for 2-3 months?
If there is a time sensitive reason not to,
that would be good to discuss.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>For clarity, revising the IGC charter was
only ever an idea, its not been agreed to
anywhere by anyone. It's just something to
discuss, further down the line. Perhaps.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best</div>
<div>Sheetal<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, 17 Jul
2019 at 12:40, Nnenna Nwakanma <<a
href="mailto:governance@lists.riseup.net"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">governance@lists.riseup.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>I think we can pull off an IGC
elections by Berlin IGF.<br>
</div>
Joining the IGC from BB should not be "a
process".<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Once an individual decides that it is
worth it.. it only takes a click to accept
the charter and be added to the mailing
list.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>My 2 cents</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Nnenna<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed,
Jul 17, 2019 at 11:36 AM Suresh
Ramasubramanian <<a
href="mailto:suresh@hserus.net"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">suresh@hserus.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-IN">
<div
class="gmail-m_-1839724901850448854gmail-m_3561223288472794221gmail-m_-1884700876395715120WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Much to my
surprise I agree with Parminder.
If Bestbits is to be wound up, so
be it.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>After
which, those from Bestbits who
wish to caucus in the IGC please
subscribe to the list and do so.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<div
style="border-color:rgb(181,196,223)
currentcolor
currentcolor;border-style:solid none
none;border-width:1pt medium
medium;padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black">From:
</span></b><span
style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><<a
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.riseup.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">governance-request@lists.riseup.net</a>>
on behalf of parminder <<a
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">parminder@itforchange.net</a>><br>
<b>Reply to: </b>parminder <<a
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">parminder@itforchange.net</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Wednesday, 17 July
2019 at 4:50 pm<br>
<b>To: </b>Arsène Tungali <<a
href="mailto:arsenebaguma@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">arsenebaguma@gmail.com</a>>,
Sheetal Kumar <<a
href="mailto:sheetal@gp-digital.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">sheetal@gp-digital.org</a>><br>
<b>Cc: </b>"<a
href="mailto:ian.peter@ianpeter.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">ian.peter@ianpeter.com</a>"
<<a
href="mailto:ian.peter@ianpeter.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">ian.peter@ianpeter.com</a>>,
"Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro"
<<a
href="mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com</a>>,
governance <<a
href="mailto:governance@lists.riseup.net"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">governance@lists.riseup.net</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re:
[governance] Reviving IGC:
Merging Bestbits in, IGF Day
zero event and other subjects</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 17/07/19 3:25
PM, Arsène Tungali wrote:<br>
<br>
</p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<pre>Good point, Sheetal and I agree with you.</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>I had briefly discussed the election issue with Bruna during the last</pre>
<pre>ICANN meeting and we agreed that the best time to conduct co-co</pre>
<pre>elections is right after the merger step is completed, the new charter</pre>
<pre>has been adopted and we have a unified list. I am sure Bruna was</pre>
<pre>planning to report this to the list at some point, but here you are.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Arsene</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">I
am not sure what you mean about a
unified list...</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">There
is a clear, and rather easy, way
to join the IGC, and it is up to
to those in Bestbits and not
already in IGC to take that route
if they want to. Meanwhile we do
welcome all civil society members
adhering to iGC's charter (rather
than insisting for, unclear and
unstated reasons, to modify it). </span></p>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">And
there is really no merger involved
here, even if people loosely use
that language .</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">I
remain astonished about the
repeated talk about a new IGC
charter, especially as an already
decided thing! What exactly are
you talking about. </span></p>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">And
I am further pained for you, being
still perhaps an IGC
co-coordinator, not at all
responding to my clear email about
how this elist is the primary work
place for the IGC, and also an
ex-coordinator's assent tp the
sentiment.</span></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<pre> </pre>
<pre>I would suggest we all plan to attend the call and agree on next steps.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">You
can make whatever calls and agree
on whatever steps you have you may
wish to -- that is no part of
IGC's procedure, and would have no
meaning or consequence for it.</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">regards</span></p>
<p><span
style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">parminder
</span></p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<pre> </pre>
<pre>Regards,</pre>
<pre>Arsene</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>2019-07-17 11:44 UTC+02:00, Sheetal Kumar <a href="mailto:sheetal@gp-digital.org" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><sheetal@gp-digital.org></a>:</pre>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<pre>Dear all,</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>While the closure of Bestbits is an internal matter for Bestbits, we have</pre>
<pre>agreed for it to be closed and so I'd say any IGC conversations need to</pre>
<pre>take that into account. We're at that point where the closure has been</pre>
<pre>agreed but there are still people on Bestbits who are not on IGC but likely</pre>
<pre>will sign up to be part of the discussions soon.</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>As such, shouldn't we wait for those from Bestbits who want to join to join</pre>
<pre>and we can then get the IGC coordinator elections going? The call to agree</pre>
<pre>next steps and make sure everyone is on the same page is going to be w/c</pre>
<pre>August 5.</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>Best</pre>
<pre>Sheetal</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 06:29, <a href="mailto:ian.peter@ianpeter.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">ian.peter@ianpeter.com</a></pre>
<pre><a href="mailto:ian.peter@ianpeter.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><ian.peter@ianpeter.com></a></pre>
<pre>wrote:</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<pre>Bruna,</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>On a more substantive matter -</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>Can you also advise us on how progress is going as regards getting the</pre>
<pre>IGC</pre>
<pre>Coordinator elections (which were due last January) underway? On June 26</pre>
<pre>you advised the list that you. would be talking to Arsene and would get</pre>
<pre>back to the list ASAP. Do you have an update?</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>Ian Peter</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>------ Original Message ------</pre>
<pre>From: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <a href="mailto:governance@lists.riseup.net" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><governance@lists.riseup.net></a></pre>
<pre>To: "Parminder" <a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><parminder@itforchange.net></a></pre>
<pre>Cc: "governance" <a href="mailto:governance@lists.riseup.net" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><governance@lists.riseup.net></a></pre>
<pre>Sent: 17/07/2019 2:14:13 PM</pre>
<pre>Subject: Re: [governance] Reviving IGC: Merging Bestbits in, IGF Day zero</pre>
<pre>event and other subjects</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>Agree with Parminder.</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>On Wed, 17 Jul 2019, 5:11 am parminder, <a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><parminder@itforchange.net></a></pre>
<pre>wrote:</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<pre>HI Bruna/ All</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>Good morning to all!</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>Bestbits' merging into the IGC is their internal matter.</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>As for a day zero event at the IGF for the IGC, when do you plan it...</pre>
<pre>Just Net Coalition has an event post lunch on day zero, and please</pre>
<pre>ensure</pre>
<pre>that these do not clash. Thanks.</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>While as a secondary or adjunct method call based discussions can be</pre>
<pre>done</pre>
<pre>among however wishes to do so, the charter clearly says that the main</pre>
<pre>and</pre>
<pre>authoritative space of IGC's work will be this e-list, which I request</pre>
<pre>everyone's attention to.</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>thanks and best regards</pre>
<pre> </pre>
<pre>parminder</pre>
<pre>On 17/07/19 7:32 AM, Bruna Martins dos Santos (via </pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"
class="gmail-m_-1839724901850448854gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:12.8px"><font
face="verdana,
sans-serif"
color="#073763"><b><br>
</b></font></div>
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:12.8px"><font
face="verdana,
sans-serif"
color="#073763"><b>Sheetal
Kumar</b></font></div>
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:12.8px"><font
face="verdana,
sans-serif"
color="#073763">Programme
Lead | GLOBAL
PARTNERS
DIGITAL</font>
<div>
<div><span
style="color:rgb(102,102,102)"><font
size="1"
face="verdana,
sans-serif">Second
Home, 68-80
Hanbury
Street,
London, E1 5JL</font></span></div>
<div><span
style="color:rgb(102,102,102)"><font
size="1"
face="verdana,
sans-serif">T: +44
(0)20 3 818
3258</font><font
size="1"
face="verdana,
sans-serif">|
M: +44
(0)7739569514 |
<br>
</font><span><span
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font size="1">PGP ID:
E592EFBBEAB1CF31
</font></span></span><span><span
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font size="1"><span><font
size="1"
face="verdana,
sans-serif">|
</font></span>PGP Fingerprint:
F5D5 114D 173B
E9E2 0603 DD7F
E592 EFBB EAB1
CF31</font></span></span><span><span><font
size="1"
face="verdana,
sans-serif">|
</font></span><br>
</span></span><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><span>---</span><br>
<span>To unsubscribe: <<a
href="mailto:igc-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:igc-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net</a>></span><br>
<span>List help: <<a
href="https://riseup.net/lists"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://riseup.net/lists</a>></span><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset
class="gmail-m_-1839724901850448854mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="gmail-m_-1839724901850448854moz-quote-pre">---
To unsubscribe: <a class="gmail-m_-1839724901850448854moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:igc-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><mailto:igc-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net></a>
List help: <a class="gmail-m_-1839724901850448854moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://riseup.net/lists" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><https://riseup.net/lists></a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:12.8px"><font
face="verdana,
sans-serif"
color="#073763"><b><br>
</b></font></div>
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:12.8px"><font
face="verdana,
sans-serif"
color="#073763"><b>Sheetal
Kumar</b></font></div>
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:12.8px"><font
face="verdana,
sans-serif"
color="#073763">Programme
Lead | GLOBAL
PARTNERS
DIGITAL</font>
<div>
<div><span
style="color:rgb(102,102,102)"><font
size="1"
face="verdana,
sans-serif">Second
Home, 68-80
Hanbury
Street,
London, E1 5JL</font></span></div>
<div><span
style="color:rgb(102,102,102)"><font
size="1"
face="verdana,
sans-serif">T: +44
(0)20 3 818
3258</font><font
size="1"
face="verdana,
sans-serif">|
M: +44
(0)7739569514 |
<br>
</font><span><span
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font size="1">PGP ID:
E592EFBBEAB1CF31
</font></span></span><span><span
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><font size="1"><span><font
size="1"
face="verdana,
sans-serif">|
</font></span>PGP Fingerprint:
F5D5 114D 173B
E9E2 0603 DD7F
E592 EFBB EAB1
CF31</font></span></span><span><span><font
size="1"
face="verdana,
sans-serif">|
</font></span><br>
</span></span><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>