[bestbits] Brief update on MAG meeting on IGF retreat

[Jac sm Kee]

Hi all,


> have a quick question: whose recommendations are these? I would love
instead to hear what DESA has to say about the issues raised (hopefully
by MAG members or participants to the call).
JK: Recommendations from everyone at the call. Ranging from some MAG
members, and some ex-MAG who were given the floor to speak at chair's
discretion.

Parminder, as Renata mentioned, it's presented as a UNDESA event - so
Wai Min and Denis (sp?) was there from DESA responding to questions.

Main gist:
- Participatory was a key word: for both inputs and outputs
- They'll look into remote participation, at least partially, as this
was seen to be a priority
- It's currently looked to be a one-off event
- The methodology is still being shaped, but being seen as really a
small group strategising/brainstorming event (so the emphasis around
this being a more start to a proper strategy than an actual strategy to
be implemented by MAG participants to the call was strong on this)

Other MAG members here may also have more info which I may have missed
out on. But this is as far as I remember. Transcripts are of course
available as well on the IGF site if you're interested in more specific
responses from DESA and the secretariat.


j


---------------------------------
Jac sm Kee
Manager, Women's Rights Programme
Association for Progressive Communications
www.apc.org | www.takebackthetech.net | erotics.apc.org
Jitsi: jacsmk | Skype: jacsmk | Twitter: @jhybe

On 02/06/2016 16:32, parminder wrote:
> Thanks Jac
> 
> Do we know if it is strictly a UNDESA owned, funded and run event, or is
> it co-funded? Are there any other principals here than UNDESA? Or is it
> really a fully UN event, like UN agencies do hold once in a while? The
> fact that they are not using UN facilities in NY but are meeting outside
> does partly fuel my stated curiosity. thanks, parminder
> 
> 
> On Thursday 02 June 2016 01:21 PM, Jac sm Kee wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> Sharing a brief update from the MAG meeting discussing the retreat last
>> night.
>>
>> The concerns around short timeline, problematics around representation
>> and participation, interest in knowing about content as well as outputs
>> of the process, broad participation were raised also in the meeting.
>>
>> Some suggestions were put forth to address some of this, in summary:
>>
>> * That the retreat not be seen as something that makes decisions, but
>> rather the start of articulating the process for a strategic plan. So
>> part of the "journey" of IGF improvements that has begun many years ago,
>> with the opportunity of a 10 year mandate
>> * That an open process be provided for inputs to shape the agenda
>> (including e.g. CSTD recommednaitons, WSIS + 10 doc)
>> * Remote participation in some way is important to promote transparency
>> and participation, and the need to balance this against smaller space
>> for brainstorming work as forwarded by some (live tweeting, remote
>> participation at some point every day)
>> * That outputs be open for comments and inputs by everyone
>> * That there be clarity around what happens next with these outputs -
>> roles and responsibilities
>> * And that recommendations and suggestions on how to make the retreat
>> work is open for consultation and inputs
>>
>> I think that's it. May have missed out on some, but hope this gives a
>> gist of the conversation. Also happy to bring any further thoughts or
>> recommendations to the MAG space.
>>
>> j
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Jac sm Kee
>> Manager, Women's Rights Programme
>> Association for Progressive Communications
>> www.apc.org | www.takebackthetech.net | erotics.apc.org
>> Jitsi: jacsmk | Skype: jacsmk | Twitter: @jhybe
>>
>> On 01/06/2016 18:23, Nicolás Echániz wrote:
>>> On 06/01/2016 07:03 AM, Chat Garcia Ramilo wrote:
>>>> Therefore, I'd like to encourage you all to send us your nominees. If
>>>> you have other issues to raise please share them as well.
>>> One issue, that maybe is a bit late to raise by now is that doing this
>>> meeting in the USA is a poor choice. The visa process is difficult, time
>>> consuming and expensive to people in many countries.
>>>
>>> This in combination with the short notice and lack of preliminary
>>> discussion... is a bad combination.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> APC.members mailing list
>>> Info and options: http://lists.apc.org/mailman/listinfo/apc.members
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> Temporary access to APC Member Meeting page: http://meeting.apc.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=APCcm2014-December
>>> user: apc-member
>>> pswd: apc2014!
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> All conversations that take place on this list are considered confidential. As a member of the APC network, you are expected to respect this confidentiality. If you wish to circulate or quote a post from the APC.members list in any other space or forum, you MUST receive permission from the person who made the quote first on the APC.members listserv.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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 --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20160604/ad770191/attachment.sig>