[governance] Proposed contribution for the Hyderabad programme

Mon Aug 11 21:20:30 EDT 2008

Carlos and all,

  Maybe a good idea, maybe not.  Whom are these "Experts"
and what qualifies them as such?  Secondly, what weight would
such a "Expert" review vs a participants forum have?

Carlos Afonso wrote:

> Milton, what about both? I mean, a review which would involve an
> "expert" consulting group *and* a broad consultation with the Forum
> participants?
>
> Luckily, the "expert" group retained by the secretariat could be
> neutral, independent, well qualified, holistic etc etc. Probably, it
> will be none of these, but it is interesting to balance this "expert"
> view with a consultation (which will need analysis, consolidation etc as
> well).
>
> frt rgds
>
> --c.a.
>
> Milton L Mueller wrote:
> > I support this letter, but believe pretty strongly that the sentence
> > about the review of IGF needs to be reworded thusly.
> >
> > Old language:
> >> it is important that a review and evaluation of the IGF
> >> begins promptly.
> >
> > Proposed change:
> >
> > It is important that a review involving formal consultation with IGF
> > participants begins promptly.
> >
> > Hope my motivation is clear: do you want a "review and evaluation" by
> > some hack consulting group or do you want a "formal consultation" with
> > the people who actually constitute (or should constitute) the Forum?
> >
> > Milton Mueller
> > Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
> > XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology
> > ------------------------------
> > Internet Governance Project:
> > http://internetgovernance.org
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 5:34 AM
> >> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >> Subject: [governance] Proposed contribution for the Hyderabad
> >> programme paper.
> >>
> >> Proposed contribution for the Hyderabad programme paper.
> >>
> >> Just say yes or no.
> >>
> >> Anything controversial will just mean the letter's not going to get
> >> sent and again the caucus will have missed the opportunity to
> >> influence the process.  Bound to be spelling mistakes, typos and
> >> messed-up grammar (friendly amendments welcome.)
> >>
> >> All the ideas in response to Parminder's email so I hope they have
> >> our coordinator's support.  He can decide on rough consensus or not.
> >>
> >> Adam
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Contribution on the Hyderabad Programme Paper
> >>
> >> (1)  The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus fully supports the
> >> letter sent by the Internet Bill of Rights Coalition "Rights as core
> >> theme of the IGF".  The issue of rights and the Internet must remain
> >> a central theme of the IGF process.
> >>
> >> (2) About the taking stock and way forward session: we suggest that
> >> this session be organized in the same "bottom-up" manner as the other
> >> main session workshops and debates.  In light of para 76 of the Tunis
> >> Agenda,
> >>
> >>     "76. We ask the UN Secretary-General to examine the desirability
> >> of the continuation of the Forum, in formal consultation with Forum
> >> participants, within five years of its creation, and to make
> >> recommendations to the UN Membership in this regard."
> >>
> >>
> >> The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus is organizing a workshop
> >> "The role and mandate of the IGF"
> >> <http://www.intgovforum.org/workshops_08/showmelist.php?mem=71> and
> >> we would be pleased if this workshop could help support discussion
> >> during the taking stock session.  We would be pleased to work with
> >> the MAG and all other stakeholders in discussions to begin the
> >> process of review and evaluation of the IGF and how to best to
> >> include this important topic in the taking stock and way forward
> >> session at the Hyderabad meeting.
> >>
> >> (3)  The process of merging individually proposed workshops and
> >> setting-up the working groups that are now developing the main
> >> session workshops has been very unclear.  How were some workshops
> >> accepted in these working groups and some not?  What efforts have
> >> been made to ensure that a balanced representation of views is
> >> present in each of the working groups organizing the main session
> >> workshops?
> >>
> >> The caucus believes this process has not worked well, we would like
> >> clarification of the process and to be assured that all stakeholders
> >> will have the equal opportunity to participate in the working groups
> >> developing the main session workshops (and therefore greatly
> >> influencing the main session debates.)
> >>
> >> (4) We would like to hear about logistical arrangements for the
> >> meetings, particularly the daily schedule (start, finish, breaks
> >> etc), information about hotels, particularly affordable hotels, food
> >> and refreshments, Internet cafes, and the IGF Village.
> >>
> >> (5) Will there be funds to support participants from developing
> >> countries and civil society?  Could we please have details of this.
> >> We note that the September consultations may be too late to manage a
> >> smooth process for allocating funds. Improving participating from
> >> developing countries has been identified as a critical issue by the
> >> IGFs to date, we are concerned that it is not being adequately
> >> addressed.
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >>
> >> Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> 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

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
My Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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