[governance] Draft for Feedback - Briefing for MAG Nomcom: Questions

Mon Jan 5 16:12:32 EST 2009

Thanks Jeanette and Avri for this information.

I think that IGC recommendations for MAG nominees should take the time and
commitment factor very much into account. We should consider whether the
candidates we recommend will invest the time and energy to give the CS
issues the impetus they need to stay at the forefront of the MAG and IGF
work. I suggest that nominees address this point in their brief statements.

Saludos, Ginger

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Jeanette Hofmann [mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu] 
Enviado el: Lunes, 05 de Enero de 2009 04:10 p.m.
Para: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ginger Paque
CC: 'Ian Peter'
Asunto: Re: [governance] Draft for Feedback - Briefing for MAG Nomcom:
Questions

Hi Ginger, I can contribute something to the first question about time 
commitments.

The amount of effort and time is a matter of personal commitment and 
therefore varies considerably among MAG members. Some contribute a lot, 
others rather little.

Over the last year, the MAG has assumed more responsibility in the 
preparation of the program. This concerns, for example, the evaluation 
of workshop proposals, the merging of workshop proposals or the search 
for panelists. Several MAG members have also moderated or participated 
in groups involved in the organization of main sessions or open dialogue 
sessions. Such activities require quite a bit of attention and time.

It goes without saying that the more time civil society members spend on 
such tasks and the more expertise we contribute, the stronger our impact 
is likely to be.

jeanette

Ginger Paque wrote:
> *Hello everyone,*
> 
> * *
> 
> *I find Ian's posts to be very helpful, and se that we need to be 
> concrete and complete if we are to make our deadlines. I wonder if 
> anyone can answer these two additional questions for me:*
> 
> * *
> 
> *Do nominees for the MAG need to take any time commitment into 
> consideration? How much time must be dedicated to MAG activities?*
> 
> * *
> 
> *Will MAG members be required to travel to meetings? If so, is funding 
> available, or will they need to find their own funding?*
> 
> * *
> 
> *Thanks, Ginger*
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> *De:* Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com]
> *Enviado el:* Domingo, 04 de Enero de 2009 07:11 p.m.
> *Para:* governance at lists.cpsr.org
> *Asunto:* [governance] Drfat for Feedback - Briefing for MAG Nomcom
> 
>  
> 
> Happy New Year Everyone!
> 
>  
> 
> Given our very tight time constraints, I am posting a draft briefing 
> note for this years MAG Nomcom, which will be selected in a couple of 
> days. If you have additional information or suggestions to guide the 
> Nomcom, please post here so that they can "hit the ground running"
> 
>  
> 
> Briefing Note for 2009 MAG Nomcom
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Dear Nomcom members,
> 
>  
> 
> Firstly, thank you for volunteering to participate and congratulations 
> on being selected for this year's Nomcom. I've prepared this briefing 
> note to give you background to your task, but essentially the process is 
> up to you from now on.
> 
>  
> 
> Please accept this as just one input for your work. Others might have 
> comments or suggestions as well, and no doubt as a group you will have 
> discussions in private that will extend what I have been able to include 
> here.
> 
>  
> 
> Your brief is to select a range of candidates who would ably represent 
> the Internet Governance Caucus on the Multi-Stakeholder Advisory Group 
> (MAG) of the Internet Governance Forum. Please note that your selections 
> are one input only - many other bodies will be recommending candidates. 
> The slate of nominations you propose will be considered by the UN along 
> with other names put forward by other organizations.
> 
>  
> 
>  From what I have read- and others might correct me here - the MAG will 
> continue to consists of about 40 members. Half of these members will be 
> from governments and that appears to be non-negotiable. The other half 
> are a mixture of civil society, private sector, and internet technical 
> community interests. Up to two thirds of current members are likely to 
> continue on and not be replaced. So, in terms of possible seats that 
> could possibly be filled by IGC nominees, we are looking at perhaps up 
> to 8 vacancies from rotation where our nominees would be considered 
> along with others. We are also looking at a similar number of seats 
> where our current nominees and representatives could have their case 
> supported by being re-nominated by IGC.
> 
>  
> 
> An additional factor you need to consider is that the Secretariat will 
> choose an overall MAG that has geographic and gender balance. So, for 
> instance, if a government rep of a particular gender and from a 
> particular region steps down, it could well be that to obtain balance a 
> civil society nominee with matching gender and regional attributes could 
> be chosen. Similarly, if one of the government groups nominates a 
> government rep with particular gender and regional attributes, a civil 
> society nominee of the same gender and from the same region may be 
> overlooked. And this definitely might include sub-regions - so you may 
> want to cover both genders if suitable candidates are available from sub 
> regions including North and South Asia, Oceania, Arab States etc. 
> Unfortunately we have no knowledge of who is being rotated out, who is 
> resigning, and who other groups are nominating.
> 
>  
> 
> Within that context it is up to you to choose as many names as you think 
> might be put forward as suitable representatives to cover all likely 
> eventualities. There is no fixed number.
> 
>  
> 
> Let me draw your attention to a few documents of relevance, but firstly,
> 
>  
> 
> Timing is critical. The Secretariat has asked for our nominations by 
> February 15, and I believe we are at a distinct disadvantage if our 
> nominations are not completed before the February 23/24 consultations. 
> So I believe the deadline of February 15 must be adhered to.
> 
>  
> 
> A few key documents and references
> 
>  
> 
> The IGF call for proposals is at 
> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/index.php/home. Further reference on the 
> MAG's rotation considerations are at 
> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/AGD/MAG.Summary.28.02.2008.v3.pdf
> 
>  
> 
> Information on the Nomcom process is at http://www.igcaucus.org/node/2. 
> Please note that, as discussed on this list in December and generally 
> agreed to, the process may need to be speeded up to allow for the call 
> for nominations and the selection process to be completed within the 
> allotted time.
> 
>  
> 
> The report of last years MAG Nomcom is at 
> http://www.igcaucus.org/old/Nomcom2008-report_2.pdf . There are some 
> lessons to be learnt from problems last year which I believe should be 
> taken on board. One particular issue is to be sure that the call for 
> candidates includes a statement that candidate nomination details will 
> be published - without this, it is inappropriate to publish candidate 
> details.
> 
>  
> 
> TIMING
> 
>  
> 
> Unfortunately there is little choice but to meet the deadlines imposed 
> on us. This will mean that the Nomcom will have to proceed as best 
> possible within the allotted timeframe.
> 
>  
> 
> I would suggest that a timetable similar to the following needs to be 
> adopted
> 
>  
> 
> Call for nominations - on or around January 12. Close of Nominations - 
> no later than January 24. That allows a minimal three weeks for 
> evaluation and selection.
> 
>  
> 
> This sort of timetable means that the Nomcom will have to impose tight 
> deadlines for feedback from Nomcom members. Past experience suggests 
> that some Nomcom members will be far more active than others - and that 
> some Nomcom members may not meet feedback deadlines for the work to be 
> completed, irrespective of the time allotted. It is up to the Nomcom 
> chair to ensure that every attempt is made to consult every member at 
> all stages, but to proceed to complete the work so as not to 
> disadvantage IGC nominations in the overall IGF selection process.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Ian Peter
> 
> PO Box 429
> 
> Bangalow NSW 2479
> 
> Australia
> 
> Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773
> 
> www.ianpeter.com
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
____________________________________________________________
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