[governance] have more time

[Wolfgang Kleinwächter]

I agree with Milton,
 
let it as it is and move forward. Do not forget that we are not the final master of the process. We deliver input into the process. And if the arguments are strong for the single subjects - and they are - than there is no need for a priority list. And do not forget, it is a four-day-meeting with an opening and a closing ceremony.
 
Next internal group step should be working and the launch for discussions groups around a selected number of issues. 
 
Best
 
wolfgang
 
  

________________________________

From: governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org on behalf of Milton Mueller
Sent: Sat 1/04/2006 6:52 p.m.
To: drake at hei.unige.ch; governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: Re: [governance] have more time



I don't think there has been sufficient discussion for the caucus to agree on a prioritization of the submitted themes. Therefore we should just forward them to the IGF presented as coming from "members of the WSIS-CS IGC.

>>> "William Drake" <drake at hei.unige.ch> 03/31/06 9:08 AM >>>
Over the weekend it might be good to clarify the framing of the submissions.  Should they be presented as individual submissions, submissions 'by members of the caucus,' (suitably ambiguous), submissions of the caucus...?  In one file, or many, in standardized format or why bother, etc?  In any event I think they'd prefer PDFs to emails...




_______________________________________________
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