[governance] .xxx. igc and igf

[Lee McKnight]

Agreed, a workshop or really a workshop and a plenary discussion on
ICANN Evolution at IGF II is  needed.

Doesn't directly affect the continual internal reorgs ICANN is going
through, as it should, nor obviate the need for broader participation
within iCANN whihc  Vittorio is reasonably calling for, but provides a
second still broader venue for this debate - and maybe -
recommendations.

And, now that IGF I proved itself to be a useful place for broader
dialogue, I suspect any a priori constraints on topics IGF II is 'free'
to discuss are gone.

Lee

Prof. Lee W. McKnight
School of Information Studies
Syracuse University
+1-315-443-6891office
+1-315-278-4392 mobile

>>> jam at jacquelinemorris.com 4/11/2007 9:36 AM >>>
Yes, this was brought up at that meeting and the idea was discussed
further
in informal gatherings. All so far thought it was a great idea and
should be
pursued. The only concern was whether it should be informal or formal
on the
schedule. I'd prefer that it be formally scheduled, but an informal
format
(being scheduled will allow for it to be advertised and promoted so
that
people know about it and can come, and to have interpretation and
webcasting
facilities if we want that)
Jacqueline

-----Original Message-----
From: Milton Mueller [mailto:Mueller at syr.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 6:25 PM
To: Vittorio Bertola; governance at lists.cpsr.org; ca at rits.org.br 
Cc: Parminder
Subject: Re: [governance] .xxx. igc and igf



Vittorio Bertola wrote:
>I really don't see feasible any political scenario in which 
>ICANN would take directions from the IGF.

"Take direction," no, but ICANN will respond to political pressures
from any source. And why not use IGF to stimulate awareness of ICANN
and
its issues, if there are civil society people who go to it and not 
ICANN meetings? 

> At the last ICANN meeting, 
> between known faces scattered in corridors, there 
>were talks of a fixed civil society meeting on the 
> last day of every ICANN meeting - that 
> might be a good point to start, for example.

There was also such talk at the joint NCUC-ALAC meeting. Carlos and I
have been promoting this idea for a couple of years now. 
____________________________________________________________
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 

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/754 - Release Date:
4/9/2007
10:59 PM
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/754 - Release Date:
4/9/2007
10:59 PM
 

____________________________________________________________
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
____________________________________________________________
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