No subject

Thu Jan 13 08:49:26 EST 2022

or Benedicto Fonseca Filho) it's clear that the word "summit" is intended, =
they expect it to be a high level meeting, one that can make decisions.  Th=
ey also said other stakeholders would be involved and that President Rousse=
ff intends it to be multistakeholder (i.e. made clear on multilateral/multi=
stakeholder; it's multistakeholder.)

Also seems they are keen to see international principles and norms for Inte=
rnet governance as an outcome.=20

So what did we learn from the meetings and chats Brazilian govt delegation =
about their intention for the summit, what else did they say?  What's the p=
urpose of the summit, what do they see as the outcome?  Do they have an age=
nda?  What are the known topics for discussion?  Is it a one-off meeting, o=
r do they have proposals for an ongoing process.  Was the 2015 IGF mentione=
d? (would make make sense: gives around 18 months and Brazil to start and f=

How will non-government stakeholders participate in the summit preparatory =
How will non-government stakeholders participate in the summit?
How will non-government stakeholders participate in any post-summit activit=

And what did the other stakeholders have to say?  Is the Summit the place t=
o begin discussions about the topics in the Montevideo statement?  Other is=
sues as well?  Particularly what's ICANN's role?  What are the goals of the=
 different groups: what does Business want, what do the I* want?=20



On Oct 29, 2013, at 8:14 PM, Joana Varon wrote:

> Dear people,=20
> Please, find attached the report that Laura and I have prepared about the=
 meeting of the =93coalition/dialogue=94 (it doesnt has a name yet) that ha=
ppened last friday, as a result of the meeting with civil society and Fadi =
on Thursday. Dear Carlos, please, feel free to add any further consideratio=
> Sorry for being late with this, but since Bestbits server was down, in de=
bates with BestBits steering committee and others colleagues, we have been =
trying to sort out what is the best way to report about that meeting and th=
e one with the Brazilian delegation.=20
> As there is some time sensitiveness, the report of the meeting with Fadi =
et all will be posted here, but this is what we found more suitable and wil=
l be important for the next reports and steps:
> 	=95 We need to come to an arrangement that strikes the right balance bet=
ween being inclusive and strategic as civil society, for example reporting =
back on the main list, but strategizing on closed lists or offlist. Draft w=
orking procedures on the wiki reflect your concerns relatively well. But wi=
ll attempt to integrate specific comments on those procedures once the serv=
er is back up.
> My view, and this is my personal view trying to address the concerns rais=
ed during BB meeting, is that the closed list for civil society will use th=
e widest concept of civil society, or a definition by exclusion, meaning th=
at all the people in bestbits list that are not strictly government or priv=
ate sector will be included. Problems that might come out will be addressed=
 as they show up, taking into account the goals of besbits. I do think it w=
ill be the only way forward to coordinate all the work we will have in the =
next months in a strategic manner concerning both the Brazilian Summit and =
our engagement with the coalition/dialogue. If any one have a major opposit=
ion to it, please, let us know.=20
> Otherwise, let's start debating the engagement with this coalition/dialog=
ue in a closed list?
> All the best,=20
> Joana=20
> --=20
> Joana Varon Ferraz
> @joana_varon
> PGP 0x016B8E73
> <coalition:dialogue_meeting.doc>_________________________________________=
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     bestbits at
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:

More information about the Bestbits mailing list