[governance] IGC statement FINAL VERSION

[Parminder]

Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <4B602988.8030603 at wzb.eu>, at 11:54:48 on Wed, 27 Jan 2010, 
> Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> writes
>> I don't think it is a good idea to renegotiate the agenda two months 
>> before an IGF meeting. It is neither possible to invite speakers nor 
>> to arrange workshops around main sessions if the last MAG meeting 
>> before the IGF may revise the agenda.
>
> Which is exactly why I have earlier suggested that having a MAG 
> meeting (rather than another September09-ish meeting) in July 2010 is 
> a bad idea.

Let us tie our hands, lest we do something wrong!

This just comes from lack of faith in governance processes. Why would we 
think that a MAG like group will be so stupid as to go about doing stuff 
that is not in the best interest of the IGF?

Why then, lets not have any MAG and even any IGF at all, who knows what 
they may come up with and upset happily settled apple carts.

(No one really spoke about 'renegotiating' agenda at the last moment! 
Did anyone. So this rhetoric is unnecessary and distracting. Only about 
fine-tuning language, getting closer to specific topics/ policy 
questions, deciding things about structural evolutions, detailing agenda 
for moderators etc, anything that may need a last minute decision - why 
preempt? And also why such an eagerness to forget that it is not only 
the third meeting we are speaking about dispensing with here, but also 
the second!!)

Parminder
____________________________________________________________
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