[governance] Consensus Call - IGC statements

[Parminder]

At a very minimum, you'd need to fix the last statement, where
> line breaks resulted in excess bullet points within sentences.  I seem to
> recall that in previous cases we did this and nobody had issues with it,
> and
> it's consistent with the charter.  

The statement cannot change in any substantive manner that could have the
any possibility of controversy at all. But language edits, cleaning up etc
will be done, and such inputs are fine.  

And you didn't take on board in the
> DA
> main session proposal the mention of the Brazilian support.  

That's a factual statement. Can still go in. 

.  Assuming the statements are adopted,
> perhaps we could do this before they're printed for distribution (you are
> bringing copies, yes?).

I left Bangalore a few days back and am traveling. So I wont be able to
print. I am exploring other options for print outs but not sure.

Parminder 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch]
> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 2:05 PM
> To: Singh, Parminder; Governance
> Subject: Re: [governance] Consensus Call - IGC statements
> Importance: High
> 
> Parminder,
> 
> First of all, congratulations to you on pulling this together, the effort
> is
> much appreciated.
> 
> Like probably everyone else I see substantive points here or there on
> which
> I wish we said x instead of y or also touched on z.  Also, I see now a
> certain amount of redundancy between the first two statements, which I
> argued sometime ago could be merged.  And you didn't take on board in the
> DA
> main session proposal the mention of the Brazilian support.  But whatever,
> overall it's fine and more important to have IGC statements than to
> quibble.
> So I'm a yes.
> 
> A procedural question.  There are a number of places where small bits of
> copy editing purely to clean up language (not substantive) might be
> advisable.  At a very minimum, you'd need to fix the last statement, where
> line breaks resulted in excess bullet points within sentences.  I seem to
> recall that in previous cases we did this and nobody had issues with it,
> and
> it's consistent with the charter.  Assuming the statements are adopted,
> perhaps we could do this before they're printed for distribution (you are
> bringing copies, yes?).
> 
> Best,
> 
> Bill
> 
> On 2/24/08 8:37 AM, "Parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > Changing the subject line, and marking as priority.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
> >> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 1:04 PM
> >> To: 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'
> >> Subject: IGC statements
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Everyone
> >>
> >> Pl find enclosed the proposed caucus statements for the IGF open
> >> consultations, seeking the group's consensus on them.
> >>
> >> At this stage please indicate A CLEAR YES OR NO to the statements.
> Added
> >> explanations etc are fine, but THE 'YES' OR 'NO' TO THE STATEMENTS as
> >> proposed here (and at this stage unchangeable on any member's
> suggestions)
> >> SHOULD BE VERY CLEAR.
> >>
> >> If your response is NO, please also indicate which statement, and if
> >> possible, which part of it you have specific objection to. This helps
> in
> >> the process of calling a possible rough consensus.
> >>
> >> When you accept such a group statement to be made it may not be exactly
> >> the statement you will make for yourself, given the choice. However you
> >> accept that given the prevailing views in the group this statement
> should
> >> be made on the behalf of the group.
> >>
> >> We need a good number of YESes for this statement to go, so pl indicate
> >> your vote. Numbers also affirm the group's vitality and backing of the
> >> work being done.
> >>
> >> Parminder
> >>
> >>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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