[governance] igc at igf consultations

[DRAKE William]

Avri,

Thanks for jogging our memories.  Well then, Parminder, any chance you 
could draft just a few lines addressing Adam's key concerns for approval 
at a meeting Wednesday morning?  We could read it out and submit actual 
text post hoc.  I think a key point, in light of Adam's prior message, 
would be reaffirm the practice established for Athens of the mAG 
approving all workshop proposals (or at least the 'open' ones, which any 
non-selected 'linked' ones could become).  Bottom line, since the main 
sessions inevitably will not accomodate all preferences, there must be 
free speech and an open 'market of ideas' elsewhere or the IGF will have 
been not only downsized, but distorted.

Bill

Avri Doria wrote:

> 
> On 21 maj 2007, at 10.30, William Drake wrote:
> 
>> don’t see how in the time that remains we could devise a statement  
>> and clear it through the list as an official consensus position.
> 
> 
> i think that is covered in the charter, and we have at least one  chair 
> on hand.  so although we don't have the 48 hours required by  the 
> regular process, we do have the ability to the group that is here  to 
> work with Parminder (and Vittorio if he is around)
> 
> as a reminder:
> 
>> Decisions
>>
>> The IGC will work on the basis of consensus as much as is possible.  
>> When complete consensus cannot be reached the coordinators will be  
>> jointly empowered to call rough consensus. Rough consensus, for the  
>> purposes of the IGC, is defined as the point at which an  overwhelming 
>> majority of the IGC appears to agree with a position  with any 
>> dissenting minority view having been well discussed and  respected. 
>> Rough consensus can only be called after a serious  attempt has been 
>> made to accommodate minority points of view.
>>
>> When both coordinators agree that it is necessary to make a rough  
>> consensus call, the coordinator will announce the text of the  
>> consensus decision on the mailing list and allow for at least  fourty 
>> eight (48) hours of final discussion. As discussed under the  role of 
>> the appeals team, a rough consensus call can be appealed to  the 
>> appeals team.
>> Statements and representation at meetings
>>
>> Normally, whenever there is sufficient time for a statement to be  
>> discussed and approved by the caucus as a whole, the decision  
>> procedure outlined above will be required. However, there will be  
>> occasions when members of the caucus will be attending meetings and  
>> will be presented with the opportunity to make statements that  
>> require a very quick response. In these cases, while it is still  
>> required that the caucus be informed of an upcoming statement and  its 
>> contents as soon as possible the following rule may be applied  when 
>> necessary:
>>
>>    1.
>>
>>       The coordinators will act as the official representatives of  
>> the caucus and will be responsible for approving any statement that  
>> cannot be discussed by the caucus within the time available.
>>    2.
>>
>>       In the case of face-to-face meetings, they will also  coordinate 
>> with the members of the IGC who are present. Any  statement should 
>> reflect the assumed general thinking of the  caucus, rather than just 
>> that of those members who are physically  present at the meeting.
>>    3.
>>
>>       If neither of the IGC coordinators can be physically present  in 
>> face-to-face meetings, they will delegate coordination to  another 
>> participant of such events. This delegation should, if  possible, be 
>> made before the meeting and with the advice of the  caucus.
>>    4.
>>
>>       Statements and positions on behalf of the caucus will be  
>> prepared and coordinated by the coordinators, or their delegate as  
>> appropriate.
>>    5.
>>
>>       Such statements will reflect the vision, objectives and basic  
>> principles of Civil Society in general, and the IGC in particular.  
>> Such statements will try to interpret, in good faith, the assumed  
>> general thinking of the caucus, based on past discussions and  
>> documents, and should not contradict the positions taken by the  
>> caucus in the past.
>>    6.
>>
>>       Such statements will be sent to the IGC as soon as possible,  
>> preferably before being presented, but if that is impossible, then  as 
>> soon after their presentation as possible.
>>
> 
> 
> a.
> 
> (btw, i should point out that last week and this week i am on  contract 
> to the IGF secretariat and do fill a liaison function from  the 
> secretariat to CS as part of that contract.  this email had  nothing to 
> do with that 
> function.)____________________________________________________________
> 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