[governance] Programme outline and schedule released

[Jeanette Hofmann]

I agree with Jeremy and Parminder. The secretariat has published a draft 
for people to comment on. Nothing of it should be taken as really given. 
However, the secretariat got the impression at the february consultation 
that most people liked the four themes and suggested to stick to them. 
Thus, it would probably be difficult to entirely change the four themes.
However, is is unclear yet what exactly will be discussed under these 
broad umbrellas.
Regarding selection criteria for workshops: the understanding after the 
February consultation was that at least some of the workshops should be 
tied more closely to the main themes. However, there will also be space 
for workshops that don't reflect the main themes (presumably just less 
than last year). Multi-stakeholder organization of workshops should be 
again one of the selection criteria.

In addition to the main themes there are the topical session and the 
emerging issues section. We should propose subjects for both.

jeanette


  Parminder wrote:
> Jeremy Malcolm wrote
> 
>>>Not at all, in my view.  There is no reason why we should regard the
>>>draft programme as particularly authoritative.  From what Adam has
>>>said, I doubt the acting Advisory Group spent much time on it.  It
>>>is more likely something that Marcus and Nitin drew up.  If we
>>>disagree with it, let's say so.  
> 
> 
> Especially so when the document makes it clear at the start itself that it
> focuses 'more on structure than content'. When the document itself is
> tentative and defensive about its content part, why should we treat it as
> something given....
> 
> Lets just tell them what we think is right. Let them bother if they can
> accommodate it.
> 
> 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 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
>>Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 1:19 PM
>>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>Subject: Re: [governance] Programme outline and schedule released
>>
>>
>>>William Drake wrote:
>>>
>>>>Anyway, this would seem to have two practical consequences.  First,
>>
>>given
>>
>>>>the way that the program is specified in the 6th section on Content, I
>>
>>don't
>>
>>>>see how any of the themes we've discussed proposing could be
>>
>>accommodated in
>>
>>>>the main sessions.  All four themes are probably too orthogonal no
>>
>>matter
>>
>>>>how we wordsmith their descriptions.  So the choices would seem to be a)
>>>>abandon the effort, b) adapt the proposal to reality, or c) frame it in
>>
>>a
>>
>>>>sort of "we would have liked to have had plenary discussions on the
>>>>following but see this won't be happening' sort of manner, which I
>>
>>imagine
>>
>>>>some would say is too negative etc.
>>>
>>>Not at all, in my view.  There is no reason why we should regard the
>>>draft programme as particularly authoritative.  From what Adam has
>>>said, I doubt the acting Advisory Group spent much time on it.  It
>>>is more likely something that Marcus and Nitin drew up.  If we
>>>disagree with it, let's say so.  Indeed, the draft programme outline
>>>itself makes it clear that it "is conceived a rolling document", to
>>>be amended in light of comments submitted by 17 May and made at the
>>>consultations the following week.  So I don't see why we need to
>>>adapt our proposal to reality. Rather, let's endeavour to adapt
>>>reality to our proposal.
>>
>>
>>Yes.
>>
>>And there is no need to spend all our time up to May 17 trying to
>>agree on a single comprehensive comment.  If there is something the
>>caucus agrees on write it up and send it.  For example, why is
>>discussion of "core resources" missing from the main agenda (again).
>>To get such a comment in quickly might encourage others to say the
>>same.
>>
>>Adam
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>--
>>>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
>>
>>____________________________________________________________
>>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
____________________________________________________________
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