[bestbits] [governance] Fwd: [IGFmaglist] IGF Retreat Participants

Tue Jun 21 20:57:58 EDT 2016

Hi
Thanks for mentioning gender balance and sending in these numbers. It is great to know the CSCG had an eye for this and sent a message about the
disparity of male/female participation.
I`d like just to clarify that my comments about being worried about the process
converge with a general ask for greater clarity and participation on the debate
about the next 10 years of the IGF. All that is being discussed just reaffirms
that the majority of civil society wants to participate on this debate,
considering or not its start on retreat.
My congratulations to Sala and Nnenna have been expressed in other discussion
spaces, as well as to all CS representatives. If not, here they go again.
On the spirit of moving forward, CS groups have much more to plan in relation to
perspectives on internet governance. We all hope to have some news to share on
this soon.
Best,
Renata

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 6:47 PM, Ian Peter ian.peter at ianpeter.com wrote:
If I may just touch on three things mentioned here: Firstly, submissions to the IGF Retreat close June 30. Is anyone planning a
submission? It’s one way to get things on the agenda. CSCG is doing a
submission, but in line with its brief it will only talk about cleaning up the
MAG nomination processes. ( we will make it public when it is finalised). But I
would encourage other submissions, that is one way to get matters of concern on
the table. I think the chance of a whole of civil society submission is remote
with only a week to go, so groups perhaps should take the opportunity to submit
individually. Secondly, one of the things the CSCG submission will raise is gender balance. A
point we will be making is that the continual habit of adjusting civil society
participation to give the appearance of better gender balance overall does not
solve the problem of sexual discrimination, and all stakeholders need to be
required to look more carefully at gender balance within their own selections.
As an example, looking at the overall balance among stakeholders for this
meeting you get something like Civil Society 5 – 1 male 4 female Private Sector 5 – 3 male 2 female Tech Community 5 – 4 male 1 female Government and intergovernental 26 – 23 male, 3 female Overall – 31 male, 10 female (havent double checked my figures but they wont alter much from that) Clearly
relying on civil society to provide better gender balance is doing nothing to
solve the underlying problem. And thirdly – just to clarify CSCG endorsements in this process. There was
never any dispute about Lea Kaspar, Stuart Hamilton and Anriette Esterhuysen
attending, as the direct nominees of CS MAG and CSCG respectively. However,
after some protests from our side about the process, UNDESA did eventually ask
us to endorse the nominations of Sala and Nnenna – neither of whom in the messy
and duplicative process they adopted were among the names originally considered
by CSCG. These names were suggested by UNDESA to improve overall geographic and
gender balance. The CSCG Nomcom did decide to endorse both Sala and Nnenna in
the circumstances. Both are of course excellent civil society representatives,
and it should be clear that CSCG is supportive of all the civil society
attendees at the retreat – if genuinely concerned about the messy way the
process was conducted. Ian Peter From: Renata Aquino Ribeiro Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 3:54 AM To: williams.deirdre at gmail.com Cc: James Gannon ; Nnenna Nwakanma ; Lea Kaspar ; Matthew Shears ; Best Bits ; Internet Governance ; JNC Forum Subject: Re: [governance] [bestbits] Fwd: [IGFmaglist] IGF Retreat Participants Hi (Apologies I have no idea if my msg gets out to JNC, pls fwd if appropriate) I'm not sure if being loud or making noise has done the best it could so far. I agree we should agree, as CS, on some topics but I also see the challenge on
that, being CS (fortunately) a diverse group. The topic of remote participation, for instance, has had some news in this last
call, as Lea has expressed. The twitter like updates remain. The streaming - even if partial - seems to be an idea which has been dropped
for the moment. As for the balance in SG representation on the retreat, from the list one can
easily see that CS numbers are low. Even more worrying, CSCG nominees number are
even lower. That when compared, for instance, with the numbers of gov and
intergov. I was reminded that even though CS is participating on retreat, each one of its
participants is there on their own personal capacity, not those of their
organization. So, while this makes it clearer fo the CS rep to express their thoughts, also
takes us back to the original question: what, if any, does CS as a group have to
do with the next 10 years of the IGF and how should it go about it? Just a quick addition: I find twitter updates way more able to interpretation
and polemic than streaming of a meeting, so I do not understand very well the
choice there. What isn`t spoken has much more power than what is out there in
the open. Best, Renata

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 1:42 PM, Deirdre Williams williams.deirdre at gmail.com wrote:
Particularly in the cause of transparency and inclusion this discussion should
be happening as widely as possibly among civil society. With apologies I have
therefore copied to IGC and JNC. Perhaps others can spread the word further to
as much of "global civil society" as possible, since all of us speaking together
would have a VERY loud voice that would demand attention. Best wishes Deirdre On 21 June 2016 at 12:27, James Gannon < james at cyberinvasion.net > wrote:
Just my 2c but I don’t think it should really be a negotiation, I know I may be
naïve in certain aspects of the IGF working methods but open and transparent was
always told to me to be a core concept. I don’t think we should be compromising
those ideals at this critical juncture. Without that what do we really have to
move forward with. -jg From: < bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net > on behalf of Nnenna Nwakanma < nnenna75 at gmail.com >
Reply-To: Nnenna Nwakanma < nnenna75 at gmail.com >
Date: Tuesday 21 June 2016 at 17:20
To: Lea Kaspar < lea at gp-digital.org >
Cc: Matthew Shears < mshears at cdt.org >, Best Bits < bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Fwd: [IGFmaglist] IGF Retreat Participants
Thanks, Lea

I think it is important that CS folks organisee CS remote participation. That
is, if the IGF secretariat is okay with it.

Just thinking loud

Nnenna
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Lea Kaspar < lea at gp-digital.org > wrote:
Hi all, Just got off the MAG call. Remote participation for the Retreat still not
sorted out. From what I understood, we can expect live tweeting under Chatham
house rules, but that could be it. Others on the call can corroborate - Best, Lea

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Matthew Shears < mshears at cdt.org > wrote:
Great point Ayden. I would hope that those who have been invited to participate
will continue to be push hard for remote participation.

Matthew

On 6/20/2016 11:41 AM, Ayden Fabien Férdeline wrote:
Dear Lea,

Thank you for sharing this. I note that Nitin Desai will be participating in the
Retreat remotely. I wonder if this mean that remote participation will be
available to all to observe the dialogue exchanged? Best wishes, Ayden Férdeline On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 4:31 PM, Lea Kaspar < lea at gp-digital.org > wrote:
Dear all, In case of interest, the IGF Secretariat has just published the full list of
participants to the July Retreat. See Chengetai's email below. Best,Lea Kaspar

Head of Programmes | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL

Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL

T: +44 (0)20 3818 3258 | M: +44 (0)7583 929216

gp-digital.org

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Chengetai Masango < cmasango at unog.ch >
Date: Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 4:10 PM
Subject: [IGFmaglist] IGF Retreat Participants
To: MAG-public < igfmaglist at intgovforum.org >

Dear All,

The list of IGF Retreat participants has been published at: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf-retreat-participants-list

Best regards,

Chengetai

_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org

____________________________________________________________
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

-- 

Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project
Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org
E: mshears at cdt.org | T: +44.771.247.2987

____________________________________________________________
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

--
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur
Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20160622/2e4f3d1d/attachment.htm>