[bestbits] On the future of Best Bits and the pre-IGF meeting

[Jeremy Malcolm]

On 26/7/17 4:29 am, Michael Oghia wrote:
> Thanks for this Jeremy and your work with the group. While I prefer
> option 2 in general, I must admit that I am slightly confused at times
> about which group is best for what -- for instance, if there's a civil
> society-related link, should it be sent to this list, the IG Caucus
> list, CSCG list, or another?

This is a good point, as I indicated some of the reasons why Best Bits
was originally formed became less relevant over time as new groups like
the Coordination Group were formed and as the dysfunctions of the IGC
became less (or, to be frank, similar dysfunctions arose in Best Bits). 
Maybe there should be an "Option 3" which would be for Best Bits to
merge with one of the other networks?

As for the many nice expressions of support for Option 2, these are very
gratifying and I'm continuing to follow that discussion for now.  My
only concern is that it *does* require people to back up their words
with action.  The worst thing that could happen would be for lots of
people to say that they want more active leadership/facilitation, but
for nobody to volunteer to provide it. :-)

-- 
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 ::

Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2016/11/27/key_jmalcolm.txt
PGP fingerprint: 75D2 4C0D 35EA EA2F 8CA8 8F79 4911 EC4A EDDF 1122