AW: [governance] Consensus call on IGC statement: please respond

[Parminder]

Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> On 29/01/2010, at 6:14 PM, William Drake wrote:
>
>   
>> Wolfgang is right, it's a process not an institution.
>>
>> So does that make the options
>>
>> YES + thematic working groups + process?
>> YES
>> NO
>>     
>
> No, it means these points should have been made earlier. :-P
>
> I don't mean to be flippant or disrespectful to you or Wolfgang, but there is an underlying serious point which is that we have to draw the line somewhere, and I'm drawing the line at YES + thematic working groups, YES, and NO.  Sorry. :-)
>   
Jeremy,

Since you have in any case opened the field I think it will be best to 
redo the statement a bit, without adding anything controversial. Getting 
a good statement may be a more important imperative. And we do still 
have time. We have closed statements later than this previously.

I suggest - you remove the part on 'innovative contributions' reg MAG, 
since there was always enough controversy regarding it for it not to be 
there in first place....

and add, two substantive themes - development agenda and HR - for IGF 
Vilnius.... these are our long standing demands.... and what is the 
point not to suggest even broad areas for themes, when the present 
meeting will decide the themes, and a good part of the IGF is about 
these key themes for each IGF.

I will suggest we also propose 'Network Neutrality or Open Internet' as 
a theme (good work was done on this theme by IGC co-sponsored workshop 
in IGF Sharm on this issue, and this work should be taken forward in a 
main session now)

(BTW, I would not suggest we rename IGF as a process. Let us keep it as 
what WSIS describes it - a forum, if someone has a problem with the term 
institution. Though i find it very strange those who reject intergov 
governance systems/ bodies in IG space and ask for multistakeholder ones 
also are the ones who keep weakening the structures and possibilities of 
one MS structure that is emerging -- this riddle has been beyond me, but 
lets keep it for some other time )

parminder
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100129/f4038689/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