[governance] preparing for IGF 2008

[Raquel Gatto]

Although it was my first IGF and this is my first post here:

I believe that a "theme per day" would be a good start to organize the 
multiple activities during IGF3.0. For example, the Day 1 can be CRITICAL 
INTERNET RESOURCES, divided by a main session first, then the workshop, best 
practice, etc..

And:
The important thing is that each one can not be at the same time!!!
So it is possible to attend all meetings or select those that you like!! I 
was very frustrated because more than once I had to choose between 2 
meetings at the same time.

And:
During the selection, if there is more than one proposal identical or 
similar, you should get them together. I also believe this schedule will 
give each meeting more time and participation, etc.and above all, I hope 
this procedure can avoid us from hearing the same subject over and over 
again.

At last: the remote participation and reports are very welcome...

Thanks!

Raquel



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ralf Bendrath" <bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de>
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; "Adam Peake" <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 11:03 AM
Subject: Re: [governance] preparing for IGF 2008


> Adam Peake schrieb:
>> Are the themes right? Should any be dropped, should any be added?
> To my understanding, there was a general feeling that the first "main
> themes" have been discussed enough, and that we need to focus on new ones.
> The emerging issues session for example showed that there is an increasing
> need to discuss anonymity, identification and privacy on the internet - I
> guess this would be a good new theme. Or the whole human rights theme,
> which as Max has emphazised could even be linked to tangible outcomes
> integrated by the Bill of Rights DC.
>
> I also have the feeling that people are getting sick of just sitting in a
> room and passively listening to powerpoint presentations for hours. This
> is not what you call "workshop" in natural language. Of all the events I
> was involved in, the Privacy Coalition meeting got the best feedback by
> far, because we had no presentations whatsoever, but instead asked people
> about their ideas and where they were willing to contribute and work with
> us. The result was a very engaged mix of discussing, brainstorming and
> volunteering - and this at 8:30 in the morning on the last day!
>
> Maybe this is my general sentiment: The IGF must focus on outcomes now
> (not necessarily stuff adopted in the plenary, but outcomes of workshops,
> coalitions, best practice collections, etc.), otherwise it will turn into
> just another conference. And I have the feeling that most people trust
> each other enough after two IGF meetings and numerous consultations that
> they really want to collaborate.
>
> Best, Ralf
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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