[governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations

[Jeremy Malcolm]

Adam Peake wrote:
>> As well as the phones for SMS messages, there were three email
>> addresses, English, French and Spanish,
> 
> Do you know how many messages were sent to each address (substantive, 
> not spam.)

This is going to bear out your earlier comments - there were very few, 
I'd say only a couple per session.  But the email addresses were an 
afterthought and hence were only made available from day 2.  Neither 
were they widely publicised.

> Do you have stats on use of the community site? I know it went down
> under the amount of use: what caused that? (How many concurrent users,
> what files were they pulling down to make it hit the limits etc. Not
> clear from looking at the logs of number of messages what might have
> caused it.)

There are 235 registered users.  I don't know how many of those were 
concurrent, and unfortunately the site has been configured to delete 
access logs older than one week - sorry, my fault there.  Apparently up 
to 16Mb memory can be required per user, so I could estimate the number 
of concurrent users there were when the server went down from that - 
I'll ask Chengatai.

> Chat rooms: would be helpful to know how many people registered, how
> many read (if that stat's available) how many posted.  Looks like most
> messages came from a few people (but that's usual.)

As you mentioned, there were only ever about half a dozen at a time, but 
with the site being moved over from the original server to the 
replacement one, the chat facility was broken for a while.  I got it 
back up again only just in time for the first session, but some people 
may have given up in the meantime.

>> It may not be ideal, but it's better than nothing: I suggest tell the
>> MAG we want to run with it in English at least and see if we can pick up
>> volunteers to handle other languages along the way.
> 
> Need more than that if we want to make online participation a
> meaningful part of IGF for all stakeholders.

It's a question of degree though, isn't it?  Not allowing for online 
participation at all will be exclusive of all those but the privileged 
elite who can make it to Geneva.  In that context, excluding "only" 
non-English speakers could be the lesser of two evils.

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com
Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor
host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}'
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance