[governance] IGC statement to IGF MAG

[Vittorio Bertola]

William Drake ha scritto:
>>I am fine with any suggestions. But do you still think, after seeing
>>Vittorio's email, that topical suggestions speak for themselves ??? after
> 
> Yes, and I don't know why Vittorio's messages seem so perplexed about long
> running discussions.

Ok, clarifying again: I wasn't perplexed about the themes in themselves, 
but about the idea that we would ask that the IGF's four main sessions 
should stop being an open place for "any stakeholder to raise any 
issue", and become four specialized sessions (though specialized on 
quite broad issues). My raising of another theme was not meant to get my 
favourite issue added to the other favourite ones, but just to show that 
there are plenty of other very important issues, and that it would be 
hard to convince anyone that our four are so important that the entire 
main thread of the IGF should be devoted to them and to them only, even 
if we provided rationales for this proposal, something that we're not 
really doing in our draft.

This said, I agree that the four issues that are currently in the draft 
are quite important, so let's not make this bigger than it is: I would 
suggest that we propose these four as additional main sessions, and let 
the AG decide what to do with our suggestion, though I suspect that the 
reply might be "can't you do these as workshops?".
-- 
vb.                   Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu   <--------
-------->  finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/  <--------
____________________________________________________________
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