[governance] Action on Enhanced Cooperation, please

[Vittorio Bertola]

Adam Peake ha scritto:
> Anyone have thoughts for a contribution to the stocktaking exercise?

Here they are, just a few immediate ones.

> One comment from a MAG point of view -- it was nice to be able to accept 
> all the workshop proposals for Athens.  I don't think the MAG would have 
> been good at deciding which to keep and which not.  More time this year, 
> should be able to design a better, clearer program. Without workshops, 
> it starts to look very much like a dull conference.

And let's ensure there's time to discuss proposals by the coalitions.

> No more 3 hour panels. 

...but? I agree they'd be shorter though. I didn't like the idea of a 
journalist being the one to decide who gets to speak and who doesn't, 
based on, well, how spectacular that intervention would look to him. Or, 
if you want to have TV-oriented sessions, make them shorter and do not 
let them take over the entire four days.

> I thought the format generally worked, though 
> moderators need more/better briefing.

Especially, moderators should be given a hard threshold so that at least 
half of the panel is allotted to debate (meaning with the audience, not 
just among panelists). Too many workshops ended up being showcases for 
this or that institution or program, and then there'd be no time to say 
  anything else.

 > Keep IG for development.

...as long as this doesn't mean that we can't discuss net neutrality, 
IPR, trusted computing and other themes that are mainly relevant to the 
geek community rather than to the development one :)

> Access 
> as a main theme.  Capacity building as a theme rather than cross 
> cutting.

 > Revisit para 71 for missed issues.

This is really important. Where were IPR, consumer rights etc?

 > Internet resources
> ("ICANN") should be discussed. 

On this specific point, we should be aware that there is going to be a 
hard contraposition (perhaps the hardest around) between those countries 
who really want ICANN discussed in Rio, and those countries that really 
do not want ICANN discussed in Rio, and want to discuss it in the 
"enhanced cooperation" process instead.

I'm not sure that we'd want to marry either side too strongly; I'd 
personally be happy by restating that civil society wants to be involved 
in this wherever it happens, as we are now about to tell Nitin in writing.

 > Openness, Security, Diversity are good
> themes.  Emerging issues needs completely rethinking.

Agree, but I don't like freedom seen as a subset of openness. If you 
expand the number of themes, then you need to add a specific theme on 
freedom and human rights, while focusing openness on, say, access to 
information, open standards, free software etc.

Ciao,
-- 
vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<-----
http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...
____________________________________________________________
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