[governance] IGF Review process - comments: IGC statement?

[William Drake]

Hi Ginger

On Jul 8, 2009, at 3:20 PM, Ginger Paque wrote:
>
> Below is a combined proposal, mostly of Michael Gurstein's and Garth  
> Graham's previous suggestions:

My recollection is that about a half dozen of us expressed significant  
concerns about that text and you then withdrew it, so it's not obvious  
why we'd put it back on the table as a starting point.  In any event  
it was not formulated as responses to the secretariat's specific  
questions, so one could not readily set it next to the questionnaire  
responses by other stakeholders for comparison and contrast and  
development of the synthesis paper.  Why not just do it the way  
they're asking us to?

Since we don't have a wiki to compile structured responses, an ugly  
but workable option would be to start a separate thread for each of  
the questions below, let any caucus members who are so inclined  
respond to taste, then aggregate the responses by Sunday and then we  
can try to boil them down into a few coherent paragraphs per Monday- 
Wednesday?

There might be more elegant procedures imaginable, but this might  
stimulate some low barrier to entry engagement; I doubt anyone's got  
the time to draft a complete text covering all points, but people  
might pick and choose the bits of particular interest to them.  And  
the result would be more reflective of the various views here and more  
responsive to the points the secretariat needs to address.

Just a thought,

Bill

PS: you are using a very old email address for me that is no longer  
forwarded.
>
> 1. To what extent has the IGF addressed the mandate set out for it  
> in the Tunis Agenda?
> 2. To what extent has the IGF embodied the WSIS principles?
> 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?
> 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?
> 5. Is it desirable to continue the IGF past its initial five-year  
> mandate, and why/why not?
> 6. If the continuation of the Forum is recommended, what  
> improvements would you suggest in terms of its working methods,  
> functioning and processes?
> 7. Do you have any other comments?

____________________________________________________________
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