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

[Joana Varon]

+1 to Jeremy.

Also, I really think a draft document (not just a compilation of proposals)
will be needed prior the event, so it:

a) will help transparency (meaning, it will be very bad if the participants
get into a room for 2 days, draft something and approve it without broader
consultation);

b) will help consensus building from March to the end of April (otherwise
from the submissions of proposals on March 1st to April 24 the Committees
will just become a black box)

c) probably a better proposal

On the issue about who to draft it, I agree with Jeremy that we should use
as much tools and channels needed for an online deliberative process to
build it. If how to use this tool is still too broad. I suggest EC convene
a working group with techies for that, they would have a month to organize
it. Yasodara, who built the consultation platform for Marco Civil is at
W3C, within CGI.br, It's not impossible. And we can always offer our help
for brainstorming.

And if any Committee need to facilitate and structure any text, my take is
that people will be more comfortable if it's EC, just as it is announced at
the first press release. As the chairs of HighLevel are Touré (ITU) and the
Brazilian Minister of Communication$ (in my view, not the best duet for
internet freedom/multistakeholderism).

my two cents

joana


-- 
-- 

Joana Varon Ferraz
@joana_varon
PGP 0x016B8E73




On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 5:11 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

>  On 04/02/14 22:02, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>
> 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.
>
>
> Surely there will have to be a synthesis of contributions as the basis for
> discussions in Brazil, and either the community will have to develop it, or
> the Brazil committees will have to do so; and in my opinion it would be
> better to give the community that opportunity to the extent possible.  This
> points to the need for an online deliberative process, actively facilitated
> by the appropriate Brazil committee/s.  The facilitation will be hard
> enough work in itself, and involve a degree of judgment as to how to
> present the inputs in a useful and neutral way.  I'm not understating the
> difficulty of the exercise, but surely nobody expected getting tangible
> outcomes from the Brazil meeting would be easy...
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> *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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140205/e9c5d5a0/attachment.htm>