[governance] New version of WSIS CS statement: Two IG issues

[Lee McKnight]

Yay for Bill's comments, 2 yays if Bill does the text/consensus tracking
update Ralk asked for : )

Lee

Prof. Lee W. McKnight
School of Information Studies
Syracuse University
+1-315-443-6891office
+1-315-278-4392 mobile

>>> wdrake at cpsr.org 12/1/2005 5:32 AM >>>
Hi Jeanette,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org 
> [mailto:governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org]On Behalf Of Jeanette
Hofmann

> regarding your first suggestion to add our stuff to the list of
major
> goals, it seems this is a question of political preferences and
weight.
> We can certainly suggest this addition but so might 10 other
caucuses
> who believe that gender issues, community radios and other vital
issues
> constitute crucial goals. In other words, this is for the editor
> to decide.

I understand your concern, but a few points in response:

First, while it is indeed possible that other groupings might want
their
issues so positioned, I don't think the addition of one sentence on IG
would be the primary reason for this.  There are already grounds for
such
a response. Second, IG was by any measure the most heatedly contested
and
headline grabbing focus of phase II. This is not a personal
interest-based
assertion that IG is 'more important' than other items, I think
it's a
statement of empirical fact.  There was a high-stakes global battle
underway that CS expended a great deal of effort to weigh in on, and
we
actually had an impact in some important respects, so why should we be
afraid to say this was a major concern going in?  If I were a
government
or press person reading the statement, I'd certainly wonder why IG
wasn't
listed as a key objective.  Third, frankly, my preference would be to
have
passages on each of the three main foci of the negotiations as
determined
by governments---IG, financing, and follow-up and implementation---and
one
each on HR and multistakeholder inclusion; that is, three
issue-specific
and two cross-cutting objectives.   Starting from what phase II was
actually about seems entirely logical and a clear basis upon which
Ralf
could explain what is listed here and what is not.  There is anyway
lots
of text later on in the statement on issues that received more emphasis
in
phase I.

> 2. IG caucus participation: I like your wording but wonder whether
we
> should be so specific about the working group we are discussing. Do
we
> have already agreement on the scope of the working group? I am not
> convinced yet that the wg should solely focus on "modalities". So
why
> not something like "...create a working group that will make
> recommendations on relevant aspects concerning the IGF".

Makes sense, I was just using the extant formulation.  Since Avri's ok
with your suggestion, unless someone objects, I hope Ralf can take this
on
board.  Re: Vittorio's concern, I don't think saying that the caucus
will
try to set up a WG implicitly or explicitly means that any other CS
grouping can't do what it wants.

> I agree with your points re "public good".

I don't think it makes sense for CS to patently misconstrue a
straightforward concept from economics, but it'll probably remain in
there
regardless.

Lastly, in light of things said in the thread concerning the public
awareness paragraph, I would suggest that this should be moved to the
four
para section on Education and Research, which I presume Divina played
a
role in shaping.  Clustering like points and having thematic sections
that
come from people involved in the respective caucuses would in no way
constitute a downgrading of this important concern.

Again, since Ralf is trying to wrap this up by tomorrow and wants to
know
that there is buy in before he makes changes, I hope people can weigh
in
yea or nay on the two IG points.

Best,

Bill


_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org 
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance