[governance] IGC's questions to the IGF

[Jeremy Malcolm]

Vittorio Bertola wrote:
>> Pragmatically speaking, I would change the questions into statements. 
>> This will help facilitating a quick&dirty debate among ourselves on 
>> how we want to have the IGF develop itself. And it will give us some 
>> advantage to most of the other stakeholder groups who expect a 
>> conference and nothing else.
> 
> Even more pragmatically, we are in the middle of a charter rework that 
> doesn't allow us much space for substance statements as a caucus, but we 
> could still work out a statement and get signatures under it. I would be 
> careful about not looking as the usual overcritical bunch of 
> subversives, but I would be very clear as for what we expect.

Unless there are any workshop organisers who would like to make the 
statement part of the output of their workshop, another alternative 
would be to circulate it during the Plaza as a petition, and then 
arrange to table it during the final session.  I have space booked in 
the Plaza and would be happy to host the petition there, if others 
agreed this was a good way to proceed.  I could also very easily host an 
online petition in identical terms to accompany it.

-- 
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