[governance] HAPPY EASTER/PESSACH to all of you and families + lots of chocolate!

Thu Apr 9 11:34:08 EDT 2009

Vanda Scartezini

POLO Consultores Associados

&  IT Trend

Alameda Santos 1470 cjs 1407/8

01418-903 Sao Paulo,SP.

Fone + 55 11 3266.6253

Mob + 5511 8181.1464

From: Marilia Maciel [mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 6:57 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ginger Paque
Cc: Milton L Mueller
Subject: Re: [governance] General Workshop Proposal procedure (response to

Dear Milton and all,

I understand your concern and I have to confess that it also makes me feel
unsecure to leave such a wide margin of decision on the hands of the MAG.

On the other hand, there was a negative aspect on the model that was in
place until last year, regarding the organization of the workshops, in my
opinion. If the free arrangements between workshop proposers allowed people
with the same frame of mind to get together, it also lacked transparency and
openness.

It allowed pals to define a workshop proposal and make it public when
everything was agreed, no other organizer could be included (with real
space) and no important adjustment to the main theme could be made.

I believe it´s good to start this debate early and carry it publicly. But I
also agree that we should follow this process closely, and don´t leave it
all to MAG. This should be seriously debated and I am glad that you
mentioned it.

Best regards,

Marília 

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Milton and all,

Definitely an important point here, Milton. However, as I understand it, at
this point we are not putting any real work or commitment into the
workshop proposal, but brainstorming basic ideas. Interested groups would
continue/commit with the process after the next step by the Secretariat. For
the moment, it is quite an informal proposition, as I see it, to measure the
amount of interest and to facilitate groupings before much energy is
invested in the workshop design and planning. I think this is better than
developing a full workshop proposal only to be told that workshops will be
combined/not approved. It also allows for suggestions/support for workshops
by people who are not interested in organizing them, but in attending them.
Personally, I see this as an opportunity to ask for someone else to organize
a workshop that I see as necessary to help me and the IG situation.

Thanks for bringing this up. We should be clear on this. I see the IGC role
at this point as requesting/supporting certain workshops, not committing to
developing them. Any other ideas on this? gp

 The template on the IGF page is:

1.	Propose a title for a workshop (not more then 10 words)
2.	Provide a concise description of the workshop (not more than 200
words)
3.	Does the workshop fall under any of the five broad IGF Themes
(Critical Internet Resources, Openness, Security, Access, Diversity) or
under the cross-cutting priorities (development, capacity building)?  If so
which one? (Please select the most appropriate one.)
4.	Have you organized an IGF workshop before? If so, please provide the
link to the report.
5.	Would you like to organize the workshop yourself?

1.	If so, who would you approach as co-organizers ? 
2.	If not, who do you think should organize it? 

Ginger

Ms. Virginia (Ginger) Paque

DiploFoundation

Coordinator IGCBP 09

www.diplomacy.edu/ig

VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu

  _____  

De: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu] 
Enviado el: Lunes, 23 de Marzo de 2009 09:56 a.m.
Para: 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'
Asunto: RE: [governance] Workshop on Remote Participation

Ginger, you're doing a great job of keeping track of the workshop
discussions and of compiling the responses. Thanks for that. 

My problem at this stage is that I (and, I suspect, many others) are
basically frozen in place by Bertrand's suggestion (statement?) that the
method of workshop planning and development will be completely different
this year. I am surprised that there has been no response to my expressed
concerns about this, and until there is some clarification or discussion of
those basic parameters, I think it is unwise to invest time in developing
workshops. Indeed, I am not even sure I would plan to attend the IGF if
certain worst-case scenarios play out. 

We have been told, in effect, "don't develop a detailed, coherent program
for a workshop and don't line up any people, because whatever idea you have
is going to be treated as a general "theme" and then thrown into a huge pot
and re-sorted into MAG-defined groups." And those groups may be a bunch of
people who hardly know each other with different, sometimes conflicting
agendas. If I am not correctly apprehending the meaning of those changes
please correct me. In the meantime, I await an appropriate response. 

Milton Mueller
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology
------------------------------
Internet Governance Project:
http://internetgovernance.org <http://internetgovernance.org/> 

  _____  

From: Ginger Paque [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, March 22, 2009 2:21 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] Workshop on Remote Participation

Please post your interest and ideas concerning this workshop on this thread.

Remote Participation from both the policy (inclusion) and application
(practical) perspectives (Ginger)

Ginger

Ms. Virginia (Ginger) Paque

DiploFoundation

Coordinator IGCBP 09

www.diplomacy.edu/ig

VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu

____________________________________________________________
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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090409/3cf18626/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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