[bestbits] Draft joint letter on deliberative democratic processes for the Brazil meeting

Tue Feb 4 09:13:02 EST 2014

Just one very brief update. One of the topics of the next EMC
teleconference will be "Meeting format: activities within sessions". That
would be a good opportunity to raise the point of on-site deliberation and
make proposals, I think.If there are suggestions, I would be more than
happy to convey.
M

On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Jeremy and all,
>
> The topic of models for deliberation are very important. Thanks for
> raising it.
>
> My own feeling about it is that we should either focus on pushing for
> on-site deliberative mechanisms that would facilitate consensus during the
> Sao Paulo or on pushing for an online platform. My impression is that the
> organization of the meeting would lack experience to identify the best
> model of on-site deliberation for this particular meeting and setting. If
> we want on-site deliberative mechanisms in place, we would need to offer
> assistance with that, and this would consume us. But I think it would be
> worthy.
>
> Regarding the platform, it is not clear to me what is the expected
> timeframe for us (how to make a meaningful consultation fit our schedule)
> and which document (if any) should be the base of our consultation.
> Remember, for instance, that the synthesis paper that will be produced by
> the Secretariat will only be available on March 7. Should the synthesis be
> the base of our online debate?  In my view, comments on a synthesis doc are
> likely to produce just another syntheses. It is not clear at the present
> moment that we will have an actual draft proposal on principles or
> frameworks prior to the meeting and, if so, who should produce it.
>
> If we dont work with one single document posted for comments, are we
> suggesting that everybody (at least each stakeholder group) should be able
> to post their documents for comments? Then how productive and
> cross-stakeholder would that be? Would stakeholders interact, or work to
> improve their own documents? Plus, there are huge challenges to shynthetize
> online  contributions in a way that we  "arrive at some point" and not just
> at another compilation. How do we propose that organizers make a synthesis
> of several documents being commented and evolving on different directions?
> I think that online consultations are a great idea. We have seen how
> effective they can be in our national examples. But I think they need to be
> carefully conceived and thought-thorough. My feeling either is that we take
> the time to think it through and propose something very clear and concrete
> to the organizers, or they wont probably invest their resources on that.
> But then, shouldn't we better focus on the actual dynamics of the meeting?
>
> Best,
> Marília
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 4:48 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
>
>>  On 31/01/14 12:40, Anja Kovacs wrote:
>>
>>  Thanks for this initiative, +1 from us. Please add the Internet
>> Democracy Project to the signatories.
>>
>> The only small quibble I have is that the one reference to the IGF that
>> is maintained (I read the conversation about this on the summit list)
>> continues to read a little awkwardly. I've tried to reformulate it in a
>> more positive way. Maybe an alternative for the first sentence of the
>> second para could be the following?
>>
>> *As the Brazil meeting's organisers are free to experiment with such
>> procedures, an important opportunity to achieve these objectives and to
>> thus transcend the constraints of the IGF in particular, caused by its
>> location within the UN system, now exists. *
>>
>>
>> Thanks, that's very helpful and I've incorporated that amendment now.
>>
>> This statement is now online for endorsement.  Please add yours at:
>>
>> http://bestbits.net/brazil-processes/
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> (This is the second of three sign-on statements that go live today.
>> Deborah will write about the third.)
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the
>> global campaigning voice for consumers*
>> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
>> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur,
>> Malaysia
>> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
>>
>> *WCRD 2014 - Fix Our Phone Rights!* |
>> http://consint.info/fix-our-phone-rights
>>
>> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org |
>> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
>>
>> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
>> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>>
>> *WARNING*: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly
>> recommended to enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For
>> instructions, see http://jere.my/l/8m.
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *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
>
>
>
>

-- 
*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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140204/68e39fd7/attachment.htm>