[governance] European Internet events

[Jean-Louis FULLSACK]

Dear all

Please finf hereafter two announcements made by DG Information Society of the EC :
 
EVENT ANNOUNCEMENTInternet of Things Europe 2010 1 June 2010 - 2 June 2010 Brussels, Belgium
This event will bring together business leaders, consumer advocates, policy makers and entrepeneurs to explore the opportunities and risks offered by the Internet of Things to businesses and consumers, and how these will re-shape our interactions with the real and virtual worlds over the coming years. Neelie Kroes, Vice President and EU Commissioner for Digital Agenda, will be a keynote speaker at this event.
http://www.eu-ems.com/summary.asp?event_id=55&page_id=342

EVENT ANNOUNCEMENTEuropean Summit on the Future Internet 2 June 2010 - 3 June 2010 Luxembourg
This event aims to bring together visionaries, industrial experts and scientific specialists from around Europe, to present visions, discuss technological options, new service concepts, and to jointly examine how to optimize the opportunities ahead in the making of the Future Internet.
http://summit2010.uni.lu/

Best regards
Jean-Louis Fullsack
CSDPTT-France

> Message du 25/04/10 17:14
> De : "Ginger Paque" 
> A : governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Copie à : 
> Objet : Re: [governance] OC meetings in Geneva May 10 and 11 IGC statement?
> 
> I think it is important to address these questions, and decide exactly what the IGC wants to say about the MAG.
> 
> Do we want to address the composition of the MAG? If so, exactly what needs to be done? 
> 
> Do we want to address the objective of the MAG? If so, what should it's goal be?
> 
> Do we want to address the operating procedures of the MAG? If so, is there a suggestion as to the way it should operate?
> 
> I think a short, concise, straightforward statement could be very effective. However, we need to know what we want to say. Can our MAG members and former MAG members please help here? How about others who are not happy with the way this has worked? Help us offer a solution, please.
> 
> Look forward to your concrete suggestions. Thanks!
> Ginger
> 
> On 4/23/2010 4:01 PM, McTim wrote: On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Fouad Bajwa wrote: Developing countries are slow to realize the importance of MAG and the IGF as an aid to their Internet policy making efforts ?? If this is the case, why are the majority of IGF participants from developing regions? http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/87-programme/484-igf-sharm-el-sheikh-attendance-statistics but wasn't this also a much heard mission to build the capacity of countries/developing countries on IG? I never heard this. One builds the capacity of individuals, not nation states. I've been visiting both sides of the Internet now, the ICANN and the IGF. Guess what, IGF is the last thing many want to be fulfilling the mandate of giving advise, recommendations, interacting with other institutions on Internet issues Do you have any evidence of this? - guess who does want to stay in and play this role? I assume you are referring to the Internet technical community here? If what you are speculating is true, why would they continue to support the IGF financially? and to tell you the truth, I continue to see that the Internet is really affected by a couple of big pockets and misguidance of governance in various roles and the smaller nations being kept away from the real issues. Can you name the pockets, describe the misguidance and be more specific about which smaller nations are kept away from which issues? As Parminder points it out clearly, who's role would it be to guide the developing countries. Unless our MAG members have any other personal interests, I think we would all agree to the point's Parminder made. not me. We should have a strong stance with a statement here that should cover: 1. IGC's say on the continuation of the MAG 2. Improvement in terms of representation - more members on the MAG from developing countries - especially governments I've just counted. there are ~50% OF MAG members from developing countries. What percentage would you consider fair? Why on earth would the CS IGC call for greater governmental representation on the MAG? We should be calling for more CS types, no? 
>
> [ message-footer.txt (0.4 Ko) ]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100427/f788d62c/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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t