[bestbits] Re: [governance] Brazil, WSIS 10+ and ITU

[Andrew Puddephatt]

Hi Jeanette

I should have something to send out in the next few days if you can hang
on - the results of some preliminary analysis

I¹ve been taking it easy over Xmas here

On 27/12/2013 13:27, "Jeanette Hofmann" <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:

>
>
>Am 27.12.13 11:38, schrieb "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang":
>> Hi everybody
>>
>> I would prefer on this list a discussion on substance and the
>> concrete CS contribution to the two envisaged outcome documents for
>> the meeting in Brazil: 1. a declaration of principles and 2. a road
>> map/plan of action. It is not a secondary issue how CS channels its
>> ideas into the process, and we should be represented in a proper way
>> in all committees respecting the special responsibilities of the
>> local organizers. However, substance comes first and if we want to
>> have a seat on the table, we have to demonstrate that we make
>> substantial contributions and come with new, fresh, fair and workable
>> ideas how to enhance and improve the IG processes in 2014 an beyond
>> in the intersts of individual users based on our commitmenet to human
>> rights and development.
>>
>>
>Since there seem to be several people who are tired of these big-ego
>cultivating exchanges on this list, we could actually try to work on the
>Andrew's compilation of contributions which he circulated on Dec 13.
>(subject line: input into Brazil summit). There has been no substantive
>response to this as far as I am aware of.
>
>The amount of text is a bit daunting and not easy to handle for a
>mailing list. One way to go about this would be to decide with which
>section we want to start and have someone drafting a shorter text out of
>all answers. My suggestion would be to start with questions 3:
>
>What is the case for reform of these arrangements and on what grounds
>(better protection of human rights and democracy, better representation
>from global south etc)
>and 4:
>What existing proposals for reform are you aware of and how do they meet
>the criteria for reform you set out in the previous question
>
>jeanette