[governance] IGC on its list

[cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net]

As for me I am just tooo darn shy,

--- On Mon, 7/6/09, Charity Gamboa <charityg at diplomacy.edu> wrote:
I feel the same way at times, Ginger. If I have something constructive to say here, then I comment. If I don't say anything,
 
Let us begin by being easy:
 
The questions we are asked to address are:

1. To what extent has the IGF addressed the mandate set out for it in
the Tunis Agenda? 
1a.  To date it has communicated to one another its thoughts and impressions as to how it relates to current global governance. It has recently done this on an individual basis. It has maintained open dialogue so that when matters of concern are needed to be addressed we know each other and have ready lines and understandings.
2. To what extent has the IGF embodied the WSIS principles?
2a It has not. If any such embodiment is occurring it is an accident of intellectualism or reflective of the fact that the WSIS principles are in line with general international thought on an issue.
3. What has the impact of the IGF been in direct or indirect terms?
Has it impacted you or your stakeholder group/institution/government?
Has it acted as a catalyst for change?
3a As for this list: we have complied wholeheartedly with the directives and principles as set forth in 72 found at http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/index.php/aboutigf   We have engaged in debate and the exchange of information. We have brought to light matters that without a governance disclosure list such as this would not be otherwise well discussed.
4. How effective are IGF processes in addressing the tasks set out for
it, including the functioning of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group
(MAG), Secretariat and open consultations?
4a They do not. The participation therein is a reflection of failure.
5. Is it desirable to continue the IGF past its initial five-year
mandate, and why/why not?
5a Absolutely and unequivicably yes. Regardless of volume of participation the outlet and coordination of open discussions is  more valuable than any existing governing body.
6. If the continuation of the Forum is recommended, what improvements
would you suggest in terms of its working methods, functioning and
processes?
6a Increase outreach. Increase forums on differing levels of communications. Increase the availability of lists that will allow pundits to listen to actually nonfunctioning scenarios and obtain grassroot perceptions of IG.
7. Do you have any other comments?
7a Ours is not the task of evaluation. Ours must always be the task of further inquiry and reflection on the data gained. Openness and relaxed restrictions and more participation and broader visions of reality are and should be our goals. If we are to truly be a list of governance we must always Question Authority.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090706/03e0d1ec/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