[governance] Review Panels

[Ian Peter]

Hi Bertrand,

My quick response is that, like the JPA before it, the review panels will be
more symbolic than effective and we should not expect much more. The JPA did
very little, except symbolise unilateral control; I think the review panels
will do even less, but symbolise a multistakeholder involvement.

If we want to improve internet governance we need to look further and beyond
what might be achieved by review panels.

Ian Peter

On 15/10/09 7:33 PM, "Bertrand de LA CHAPELLE" <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear all,
> 
> Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ? What do you
> think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the community is facing a
> now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) : how to compose a multi-stakeholder
> group for a given task, so that it is sufficiently diverse, balanced and
> representative of the variety of viewpoints ?
> 
> In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
> 
> Best
> 
> Bertrand
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:
>> snip
>> 
>> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
>> the process likely to be?
>> 
>> Anriette
>> 
>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091016/4521d495/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