[governance] Speakers for IGF - new faces?

[Adam Peake]

At 7:31 PM +0200 9/20/07, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
>Adam Peake ha scritto:
>>It is not at all pleasing to write "We have no money to bring 
>>anyone, the meeting starts in 8 weeks.  Suggest only recommending 
>>people who are going to be there (or have a very good chance of 
>>being there.)" This situation should not have been allowed to 
>>happen.
>
>You mean we could have started earlier? Yes we could, but alas, up 
>to one month ago there was not even an AG...


Exactly, I meant up until a month ago there was not even an advisory 
group.  Nothing to do with the caucus, not blaming you and Parminder 
for global warming or the mess with speakers :-)  My problem is with 
whoever/whatever caused the delays throughout the year.  I've said 
something about speakers at every consultation this year, this from 
February:

"And when Mr. Geiger was giving the dates of the on the WSIS meeting, it
reminded me the meeting in Athens was really prepared in a little over
five and a half months and we are now about eight and a half months out
from the Rio meeting, and so I know that, Chairman, you said you were
going to emphasize that we have to get moving and moving fast.  But it
really is time now to start approaching speakers to ask them if they can
come and speak at that meeting.  We can't just ask them to leave a week
free at the end of October and early November.  We have to be asking
specific questions of them -- Can you speak on a topic on a day -- if we
want high quality speakers to be joining these panels.

And that means getting an agenda ready and drafted as soon as possible.

If we want to have workshops that are integrated into the agenda, as
many of the people have commented should happen more during the
stock-taking session, that seemed to be something that was important to
many people, that we had a more coherent mix of workshops into the
general agenda, then we have to get the requests for workshops out as
soon as possible.

So I really do hope that you can emphasize this need for urgency to the
secretary-general, because otherwise, we're going to end up in the same
situation as Athens.  And while that was a successful meeting, we have
to make Rio a better meeting." (end quote)


Michael, same response: the post-Athens taking stocking identified 
lack of funds for participation as important to remedy -- number of 
participants from developing nations was too low. I don't think 
anything's been done.

In no way blame the secretariat for this.

Anyway, issues for the next taking stock session, not now.

Adam



>and the funding issue won't go away (unless we start focusing on how 
>to make the IGF better and stronger, which is one of the objectives 
>of our workshop). I think that Rio will suffer from "still growing 
>up" even more than Athens, and possibly IGF 2008 as well - they will 
>still be caught in the power struggles on how to give the IGF a more 
>effective structure that can work in the long term.
>
>All in all, it took ICANN 5 to 10 years of quarterly meetings to get 
>to a reasonably stable and functioning status.
>--
>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