[bestbits] WEF

[Ian Peter]

This all needs to be clarified, Jeanette...

But the primary difficulty is that civil society currently has no forum or
methodology to come to a decision on any difficult policy issue; and 
particularly to
do so within any quick time frame.

Each individual coalition comes to its own decision; or, in the case of
some groups, can't come to any decision. The
CSCG, I believe, had to discuss what to do in this context
after receiving feedback from its member coalitions.

I agree totally CSCG should ideally not be involved in policy, and in this
case time was made for each group to discuss its position and advise. But
where there are strong and divided opinions between groups as to whether to
participate or not, CSCG may have to make some sort of call as to whether to
engage or not, and under what conditions. Unless and until there is some 
sort of
overall civil society policy making structure devised, I don't see the
alternative.

And the primary dilemma is this; irrespective of the arguments in this
particular case, if civil society has no capacity to come to a decision
within a reasonable time frame as to whether to participate in an
initiative - when it was asked to be involved - we are not likely to be
asked to be involved very often.  That I guess was the primary frustration
that led me to make the statement I did earlier on rather than remain in a
more comfortable neutral stance. A decision not to participate is fine; a
decision to participate is fine also; but a lack of capacity to make any
decision or to consider lengthy delays acceptable when we have a firm
deadline, is the most harmful thing we can do to our attempts to create a
credible united CS process when it comes to nominations.

Fortunately we now have more time, and looking back even the extended 
timetable we negotiated was too short in the context of IGF and people being 
so busy.

But we still have no methodology to make a decision, so I am not sure how 
more time will help. Most likely WEF will come up again with a
request for candidates, accompanied hopefully by some clear information, and 
we will start this debate again, once more with limited time to decide.

Can you suggest to me how we then make a policy decision across multiple 
civil
society groups in a reasonable time frame as to whether to engage or not?





Ian


-----Original Message----- 
From: Jeanette Hofmann
Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2014 8:47 AM
To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
Subject: Re: [bestbits] WEF

Or the whole thing might just fizzle into nothing.

This is indeed a remarkable comment but, probably unlike what Anja
recommends, I would say that the selection committee really should not
be in the business of assessing the process or structure for which it
selects candidates.

jeanette


Am 05.09.14 22:54, schrieb Ian Peter:
> Please note that CSCG received an email yesterday from Alan Marcus of
> World Economic Forum, in reply to ours requesting clarification on
> various issues as regards possible appointment of civil society reps and
> asking for more time. Alan had already left IGF.
> The letter really clarified nothing. But it did say that yes we could
> have more time (how much not specified). Here is the text
> “I believe I understand your questions and concerns. And certainly with
> other consultations through out the week I believe I have a much better
> appreciation for where the concerns come from and what the opportunities
> for collaborative impact can be.
> As should be the case, the feedback points to improvement opportunities
> for which we are prepared to evolve our thinking.
> For now I can agree to give more time and we will take some time as well
> to ensure out "tweaks" are well thought through a(nd) reflect feedback
> we have received. “
> So I think this is all on hold at present – for how long we dont know,
> and if anyone has further information please pass it on (confidentially
> if you wish).
> One of the changes certainly seems to be that they will drop the
> NetMundial Initiative name; at least for now This was mentioned at
> several meetings throughout the week, and apparently they received a lot
> of negative feedback on this.
> What will happen as regards CS reps is unknown – we had their earlier
> agreement to appoint 4 reps, but this may be one of the “tweaks” that
> change. Or the whole thing might just fizzle into nothing.
> CSCG  will not be doing anything without further clarification.
> Ian Peter
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>






____________________________________________________________
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