[bestbits] Re: [governance] Re: [CoNE-elist 632] Agenda EMC meeting

[Jeanette Hofmann]

I agree with Adam.
I was in that room in Paris. The editing of the document work indeed 
surprisingly well. Surprisingly means it could have easily been 
otherwise. In Paris, this procedure workd because there were not that 
many people in the room, and most of the people in the room did not 
participate in the discussion.

I would not recommend a clean slate process for Sao Paulo. We all want a 
constructive outcome of that meeting, and we need to develop a procedure 
that gets us there in a less risky manner.

jeanette

Am 21.02.14 18:57, schrieb Adam Peake:
> Hi Marilia,
>
> On Feb 22, 2014, at 2:27 AM, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>
>> Hi Norbert, thanks for this comment. The information that EMC members received was that the chair of the meeting, Mr. Virgilio, expected to have an initial input to the Meeting. His understanding was that it would be a task for the EMC to produce this initial input based on the contributions received.
>>
>> According to my understanding, meeting participants would be free to do whatever they want with that document. It would be only an initial input. If it is good, it can be used as the basis for further work. If it is not, it can be changed. If it is awful (hope not), it can be discarded. My own opinion is that with approximately 12 hours of work during the two days and no possibility to divide participants in two tracks due to limitations of the venue it is important to have at least a starting point.
>
>
> This is my understanding as well.  Although the official agenda time is 8.5 hours of plenary: 4 on the roadmap topic and 4.5 on principles (or is it the other way round?)  Then we'll have some evening sessions perhaps.
>
> Whether it is a single document or a package I don't think is all that clear.  I can imagine different outcomes on the two issues. But we still need to work on modalities.
>
> It might be helpful is we had a discussion about how we will get from the first documents, that is the synthesis paper and contributions (available around March 15th I think), to documents we can take into the meeting on April 23rd. What kind of output would we like?  What's our goal?
>
> Given the known limitations, what goal(s) can we aim for?
>
>
>> Of course, I will convey different opinions.
>>
>
>
> I actually disagree with what I understand Norbert is suggesting.  Starting with a blank slate would create a process favoring those with the financial resources to attend the meeting, or a best the ability to stay online for 2 days trusting remote access (impossible for anyone without robust broadband access and power - and then there's simple things like time zone.)  Unless I am missing something.
>
> Best,
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>> Best
>> Marília
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
>> Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Parminder, all I know is that this document will be an initial
>>> input to the meeting. That's all. I have no idea of how the
>>> discussions in the meeting are going to take place. This was not
>>> discussed by the EMC and it is hard to predict, I think.
>>
>> Hi Marilia
>>
>> At the Paris WSIS+10 there was a draft document provided by UNESCO as
>> initial input into the process that created the output document. This
>> initial input got changed to the extent that it was possible, during the
>> very limited and really quite insufficient amount of time available, to
>> reach consensus in favor of proposed changes.
>>
>> If that kind of process is used again, then it is I think quite
>> plausible to predict that the outcome document would resemble the
>> “initial input”.
>>
>> I'd strongly prefer the work of the São Paulo meeting to start not
>> with a pre-prepared initial draft document, but with a blank slate. The
>> compilation of contributions is still important of course, but as a
>> compilation of ideas that the participants of the meeting can draw
>> upon for proposing additions to the (initially empty) working document.
>>
>> Greetings,
>> Norbert
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Marília Maciel
>> Pesquisadora Gestora
>> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio
>>
>> Researcher and Coordinator
>> Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School
>> http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts
>>
>> DiploFoundation associate
>> www.diplomacy.edu
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>