[governance] the matter of MAG rotation 2010,

[Yehuda Katz]

I've read a lot of thread-thoughts today regarding MAG, and learned more about
the process.
It seems to me that the Secretariat (Chair) summarizes the discussions of the
MAG and makes recommendation to the UNSG.

So in a sense the Secretariat is a Chef, to my way of thinking, the more
ingredients available (the more divers the MAG is), the more creative-freedom
the Secretariat has to create & summarize the venue with.
Aside we are subject too the mental cap of a few people.

Stay the Course ... 
The Secretariat & the UNSG have to 'Think inside the Box' due mostly to the
contingencies surrounding them. 
I beg this years MAG, not to make mistakes like last-years (The China/Rights
thing). Those kind of issues-becoming-incidents will push the IGF/IGC into the
hands of the ITU.
Because players like the Secretariat & the UNSG need to stay within their Box.
This is a warning. (Don't push so hard, or your going to kill US)

I think now is the time to discuss; What is 'safe' for the IGC to present Forum
upon and what is not.
I think we should discuss a Strategy & Argument that straightens the our hold
on the IGF, over that of the ITU.
I think we should show/illustrate that the IGC is an 'organized-and-collective'
diverse Group, being the 'Proof MAG Works'

[I also belive 'Jeremy' has the seat & brains to do this, and has my support]
____________________________________________________________
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