[governance] Re: IGF workshops - more time is needed

[karen banks]

hi

would it be possible to submit proposals with as many stake-holder 
partners as people can manage to bring together in the next 2 weeks, 
but be given an extra week or so to confirm partners?

that way, i imagine some initial assessment work could be done by the 
MAG, with confirmed partners coming in a little later..

and one thing that still isn't clear to me - are we talking about a 
criteria that there must be *multiple stakeholders* (ie, more than 
one) or *all stakeholders* which would include specifically, CSOs, 
government, business and international organsiations?

karen

At 16:34 16/06/2007, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:


>Parminder wrote:
>>Adam (and other CS members of the MAG)
>>I think that the time given for submitting proposals is too little,
>>especially when one has to get partners from different stakeholder groups,
>>which would mean first seeking partners, then collaborating on proposal text
>>and so on. I think there is no need to have people rush it, by giving around
>>3 weeks to bring full proposals to the table. Even if this serves to keep
>>the number of workshops manageable - though I am not alleging that is the
>>motive here.
>
>Hi, the rationale for the deadline end of July is to give enough 
>time for asking speakers or panelists. The MAG thought that 
>well-known experts are difficult to get and need to be asked as 
>early as possible.
>jeanette
>
>>This works against new groups, and new partnerships, organizing workshops.
>>Most CS groups are just about learning about the workshop call and even in
>>this age of digital communications - these calls take time in moving away
>>from the centre towards relative peripheries. I just now saw the call for
>>IGF workshops put out in the WSIS Disability Causus, inviting ideas.  What
>>we will have, in such short time, is the usual suspects in usual
>>combinations, and that's really against the main principles and ideals of
>>IGF. The idea is to get different kinds of people in, and different kinds
>>talking to each other (as Nitin keeps saying). This central objective is
>>defeated by giving such a short notice for completing workshop proposals.
>>This also works against less- resourced and less- connected people and
>>groups.
>>I think we should move the deadline at least to July 15th. I see no great
>>reason for sticking to this timeline. I request CS MAG members to
>>communicate this request to the MAG and the secretariat. Others may also
>>give their views on this, and if others agree, it can be communicated on
>>behalf of 'some CS members'.
>>This appeal comes directly from the problems being faced with some CS groups
>>in which I am involved, in terms of the required time, in reaching out to
>>new partners for some activities that we want to organize. And when I
>>thought of it I could see that most/many CS groups must be facing this
>>problem.
>>Now, if the number of workshops goes beyond what can be handled
>>logistically, we will need to come out with some solutions for that. But for
>>the present lets open up the process more, in terms of the time available to
>>respond with full proposals for organizing these workshops. This will both
>>improve participation, and the diversity of partnerships of the workshops.
>>Parminder
>>________________________________________________
>>Parminder Jeet Singh
>>IT for Change, Bangalore
>>Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities Tel: 
>>(+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890
>>Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055
>>www.ITforChange.net
>____________________________________________________________
>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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070616/a5068da5/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: message-footer.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070616/a5068da5/attachment.txt>