AW: [governance] IGF delhi format

[Kleinwächter, Wolfgang]

Milton:
Anyway, if a clueful MAG or IGF Secretariat was willing to challenge powerful organizations to enter into the spirit of the Forum it would not be difficult to nip in the bud any attempts to boycott. Let's say WIPO refuses to participate in a controversial panel about global IPR governance and the role of WIPO. They should get a call from the Secretariat who says, "hey, what's up with that? You should be on this panel, its about your issues." That scenario doesn't seem unrealistic to
me. The Secretariat should have the knowledge and the cojones to do that. Long term it would increase respect for the IGF.

Wolfgang:
Milton is right. The majority of the workshops is one sided, domonated by the interests of the organizers. So far this is okay with me. But probably we should think about two doifferent categories of workshops: Catageory I would be organozed by the IGF Secretariat/MAG similar to the plenaries. In such an "official" workshop you can guaranetee a balance. Category II would be self-organized by proposers. Even in this case, proposers would have to fulfill some criteria, and one criteria should include the principle "give both sides" if it comes to a controversial issue. More work for the MAG. Which probably would lead to have working groups within the MAG itself. 
____________________________________________________________
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