[governance] communicating with our peers

[Parminder]

Yes, Jeremy, we shd put a clearer set of processes in this regard. And this
is the purpose of this round of discussions on the role CS members can and
should play inside the MAG. I am not doing it for mud slinging or anything.


And Jeanette, I agree when you say

>But as Adam hinted already, you will be 
>surprised how little there is to report over many months.

But why there isnt much activity in MAG. Is the MAG ever worried about
whether IGF is carrying out its mandate or not.. do they ever discuss that
or not. Are they worried about that people now largely think of IGF as
ineffectual, and not having met its best expectations, and not doing all it
should and could have done.... does this worry them? If not why? Do our CS
MAG members at all bring up these issues at all. Or do they, and no one
engages with them. We need to know. Does MAG only concerns itself with IGF
meeting program management functions. Why wouldn't they discuss the role and
expectations from the IGF. When so much is happening of social and political
significance around the Internet is MAG ever concerned that global internet
related public policy gaps have been becoming more even more significant
post WSIS, and that even the WSIS expectations about some institutional
development in this area has had zero progress. Do they deliberate about
what role IGF has in all this.

We need to know why the present dispensation - the MAG etc - is so smug
about IGF. And do CS MAG members raise these issues. If so, what response do
they get. Who has taken this political decision that the present
non-performing style of the IGF is exactly what it should have been. Is any
dissidence voiced against this. Or is there more or less one voice in the
MAG about these issues...

We all sit here in the dark without any clue about what is happening about,
and in, the only institutional arrangement in the area of IG which has come
out of the expensive exercise of the WSIS, and we are told - well mostly
everything has been reported, and mostly nothing is happening. Is there a
failure of CS in all this.... even if CS often has less than most other
groups, do we raise our voice enough, and often enough, because being vocal
and assertive is the only weapon we have got. Or do we become different in
the plush interiors of institutions than we are out in the open spaces which
are the natural grounds of CS. 

Parminder   

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeanette Hofmann [mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu] 
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 1:47 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Jeremy Malcolm
Subject: Re: [governance] communicating with our peers

Yes, this sounds doable. But as Adam hinted already, you will be 
surprised how little there is to report over many months. Anyway, if 
others think this a good idea and the cs members on the MAG agree, we 
should do it.
jeanette

Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> On 06/02/2008, at 8:26 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
> 
>> Parminder wrote:
>>>> If you're just saying the civil society members don't report enough 
>>>> of what's being said, you're right.  We don't.
>>> That's the whole thing, the entire point of the discussion and not a 
>>> minor
>>> post-script to the discussion. Can we know and try to understand why we
>>> don't.
>>
>> Actually I am not sure if there has been any substantial issue that 
>> hasn't been reported by any of us.
> 
> How about setting in place more of a procedure, rather than leaving 
> reporting ad hoc as at present?  For example, producing a regular 
> fortnightly or monthly summary of discussions, and filling in any gaps 
> in the reports of in-person meetings would be helpful.  This doesn't let 
> the Chairs of the Advisory Group off the hook for not formalising such 
> procedures, but since it's within the power of the CS representatives to 
> increase the transparency of the MAG independently, it confuses many 
> that they haven't.
> 
> --Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com
> Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor
> host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}'
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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