[bestbits] IGF open consultation and MAG meeting December 2014

[Anriette Esterhuysen]

Dear Jeremy

It is not  simply a case of these comments being ignored. The problem is
that there is not structure that can effectively evaluate them and
implement them.

Some suggestions have eventually found their way into some form of
implementation. The more 'practical' they are the more likely that the
Secretariat will do what they can to follow up. The more political and
strategic they are, the more complex and as the MAG tends to work on
consensus suggestions where different stakeholders have different views
(e.g. on the IGF making policy recommendations) are likely to go nowhere.

Also I have learnt - and it has really taken me years - that in the UN
system, and in policy advocacy in general, asking for the same things
year after year actually often works in the long run.  Civil society has
had in my view the clearest vision of what the IGF needs since its onset
(e.g. working groups, thematic IGFs, outcomes, inter-institutional
dialogue, support for participation, new approach to main sessions, etc.
etc.)

Why don't we do a stocktake of all our recommendations since the
beginning and resubmit those that that we can agree on  as important? It
will also be good in that we can see where we have been successful, or
partly successful. E.g. Best Bits asked for IG principles in 2012. We
now have them in the form of the NETmundial statement - and it is a set
of principles that draws extensively on our own work in the IRP dynamic
coalition.  What next?

Anriette


On 25/09/2014 18:33, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> On 25/09/2014 2:32 am, William Drake wrote:
>> 4)  Strengthening the IGF, consistent with the NETmundial statement.
>>  Intersessional work to prepare a topic or two that is ‘mature’
>> enough to yield some measure of convergence and could be treated for
>> one day in the NM manner could be a very useful way to demonstrate
>> the increasing utility of the IGF to the UNGA and others.  There are
>> various ideas about how this might be done, and it’d be great to see
>> some of them in submissions.
>
> Agreed, but it's not as if these ideas have not already been put
> forward ad infinitum over previous years. Consider this Best Bits
> submission from 2013, which remains equally relevant today:
>
> http://bestbits.net/igf-opinions/
>
> (and a follow-up from 2014, http://bestbits.net/igf-2014-submission/).
>
> The problem is that the suggestions are just ignored.  Of course, it
> won't stop us from making them again...
>
> -- 
> Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Global Policy Analyst
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
> https://eff.org
> jmalcolm at eff.org
>
> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
>
> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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

-- 
`````````````````````````````````
anriette esterhuysen
executive director
association for progressive communications
po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
anriette at apc.org
www.apc.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140925/5b1a0424/attachment.htm>