[governance] IGF next steps

[Carlos Afonso]

Actually they were not answered, as the comments did not follow any rule 
and were not consolidated and approved in some way. You might say some 
answers reside in the many comments, but this needs to be more precisely 
done and some consensus is to be built as follow-up, so Nitin was right 
in asking for this.

frt rgds

--c.a.

Avri Doria wrote:
> hi,
> 
> yes.  but if you remember Nitin's last comments, he did establish  
> these two questions and the first deadline.
> 
> and who knows, maybe some of the dialogue during the meeting has  
> caused some to reconsider, not to mention the G77 request that they  
> be given time to think about the difference between a bureau and a  
> multistakeholder program committee.
> 
> as for the topics, while many people mentioned the topics or topics  
> they where interested in, now that we have a discussed set of  
> candidates, it makes sense to get an idea of the top 3 priorities for  
> year 1 on each respondent's list.
> 
> a.
> 
> On 20 feb 2006, at 18.42, Raul Echeberria wrote:
> 
> 
>>I think that these questions have been already answered both in the  
>>public comments and in the meeting last week.
>>
>>Raúl
>>
>>
>>At 01:08 p.m. 20/02/2006, Avri Doria wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>The IGF web site has been updated: http://www.intgovforum.org/
>>>especially noteworthy are the calls for contributions on:
>>>
>>>- Whether there is a need for a multistakeholder group to prepare for
>>>the meeting.
>>>- Which public policy issues the first meeting of the IGF should
>>>address.
>>>
>>>All stakeholders are invited to submit their views on these  
>>>questions.
>>>
>>>Please let us know what your views are on:
>>>
>>>a) The need for a multistakeholder group to assist the the Secretary-
>>>General in convening the IGF, what the mandate of this group should
>>>be and how it should be formed.
>>>Please submit your comments by 28 February 2006.
>>>
>>>b) Public policy issues to be discussed at the first meeting of  
>>>the IGF.
>>>Please let us know your top three choices and give a short
>>>explanation on the reasons for your choices by 31 March 2006.
>>>
>>>a.
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>governance mailing list
>>>governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>>https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.11/264 - Release Date:  
>>>17/02/2006
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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