[bestbits] Call for making the IGF permanent

[Jeremy Malcolm]

On Sep 1, 2014, at 12:47 PM, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:

> I certainly am of the view that simply calling for permanancy is not enough, and figuring out what the next stage of the maturity model and what  it means has not achieved rough consensus (Adam spoke about this this morning in the session) so we will need to split off the stuff that does not have consensus and needs to be explored. Articulating the themes of that would be useful though and should not be dropped IMHO. 

Agreed.  So far the text on IGF's permanent mandate on the Etherpad is very minimal and simply says "We call for the establishment of the IGF as a permanent multistakeholder forum with strengthened support."  There may be merit in keeping it this simple, so that it could be offered as the wording for the multi-stakeholder statement.  The longer it is, the more likely disagreement will keep in.  Yet, despite its simplicity, the message is still strong.

-- 
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 ::

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140901/0f89a939/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 204 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140901/0f89a939/attachment.sig>