[governance] WSIS principles and conferences

[Danny Butt]

Could someone clarify the likely role of the IGF advisory group?

If the advisory group will be establishing a process for the forum,  
then our initial role in that should probably be finding CS members  
with process expertise to put forward. I think that WGIG members  
might be precisely the most useful people for that advisory process.  
This might be different than the kind of representation we would want  
for this caucus as a mechanism for CS participation in the IGF itself  
- where particular areas of domain expertise would be useful, and  
where broader outreach will be valuable.

I support Avri's suggestion of a nominating committee that excludes  
IGF-MAG participants, and also the use of the process in RFC3797.

We currently have no way of gauging consensus, but if the nomcom idea  
is agreed to, I am happy to volunteer for the nominating committee.

I can also work on a charter for the group, but I think this is going  
to take a bit longer, can it can come after we get through the IGF- 
MAG process? But I agree with Bill that there is a good opportunity  
here and it should be taken.

Regards,

Danny


On 18/03/2006, at 6:12 AM, Vittorio Bertola wrote:

>
> Personally, I will be happy to work on a charter for the group, with
> whoever else wants to join. We haven't decided what we want the  
> group to
> be - procedure only or also substance related, for example - but I  
> guess
> we can follow the proactivity rule: those who really care will work  
> out
> the details, and others will follow as long as they make good choices.




-- 
Danny Butt
db at dannybutt.net | http://www.dannybutt.net
Suma Media Consulting | http://www.sumamedia.com
Private Bag MBE P145, Auckland, Aotearoa New Zealand
Ph: +64 21 456 379 | Fx: +64 21 291 0200


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