[governance] Re: Nail Biting and Remote PARTICIPATION in the Geneva IGF Open Consultations
Eric Dierker
cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net
Thu Jul 1 13:18:33 EDT 2010
Thomas,
(allow me to leave the CityTLD alone for this post)
What you wrote here is of huge importance. This distance between our office/home/IntCafe and actual interface is larger than we give common credit. All salient minds of this time recognize fight and flight as primal, indeed sometimes ultimate, forces in our conduct as individuals. One can say fear or rage, or one can say pleasure or pain. The motivational theory is similar.
Here you began with "nail biting" and then you brought it up close and personal. I posit - that there are many who fail to participate because of a fear of what you related. Combined with a fear of failure and embarrassment. These are stumbling blocks for the individuals who we really need to participate. We most generally combat fear with knowledge and understanding and a full slaying of the boogeyman of self worry caused by ignorance. By sharing this episode I hope that many will feel empowered to overcome that fear and realize it is as normal as the day is long.
In likeness I often hope that my embarassment and failure to be smart would encourage others that they need not be brilliant to have an opinion that is worthy to someone.
Bravery is not the doing of a great act, it is in the facing and conquering of a great fear. You remind us that for us normal folks it is OK to be afraid of the technology and the movers and shakers and powerful folk. The Hero is the man like Thomas who overcomes with humility and gets something done.
And a huge Kudo to all those who assisted you. Synergy is awesome.
Eric
________________________________
From: Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com>
To: Eric Dierker <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>; governance at lists.cpsr.org
Sent: Thu, July 1, 2010 9:41:16 AM
Subject: Nail Biting and Remote Participation in the Geneva IGF Open Consultations
Eric,
Sorry for taking so long to get back but it was to be a
busy week before all of the below happened.
After 2 + months of planning and preparation of the
City TLD Governance and Best Practices workshop I'd proposed for IGF Vilnius, I
received the below "get ready" email from Ginger on Sunday afternoon. I'd given
some thought to checking in to Geneva from NYC but thought, with the clearly
identified need and great panel we'd put together, that acceptance would be
unquestioned. But Ginger's note got me to rethink
the situation.
(I'll not hold anyone in suspense here and will note
that the workshop is scheduled for Friday, September 17, 2:30-4:30 at the
Lithuanian Exhibition and Conference Center, Room 5. This message is a review of
the nail biting experience the Open Consultations turned out to be and to
comment on an appropriate interface for such an event in 2010.)
After getting Ginger's email I said, humm, maybe I should
send an email to the igf at unog.ch requesting an
update, and did so. And a later email suggested I update IGF at june2010 at intgovforum.org. I'd just sent an update to this list and decided to modify it and
send a copy to the june2010 address.
On Monday morning I got up at 4 AM and connected to
the official remote platform in Geneva. I got a reasonably steady video stream
with a scribe text below. (Could have been the early morning, but at times it
seemed that the scribe was ahead of the video.) To the right was a chat feature.
Enter your name, get moderator OK, and it seemed like comments were posted
somewhat real-time. But I wasn't sure.
My confidence about easy approval waned substantially
on Monday afternoon, Geneva time, when the review of the 150 or so submissions
for workshops started. The moderator, Nitin Desai noted that there were 60
slots. And many had been green-lighted before the meeting. So I started
biting the nails. But I couldn't do a good job of that because I realized
that there were people in the room that were scheduled to be on the panel
and IGC people who'd volunteered to assist. So I
start searching for email address of those in the room to urge them to
speak up (the addresses were of course on another machine and I needed to run
back and forth forwarding emails from one machine to another). And then I was
told that Twitter hash #igf10 was the place to communicate with IGCers So I'm
sending emails, monitoring the video - and occasionally looking to the scribe
for clarification, watching the remote platform chat to the right - there were
apparently a few of these depending upon which video or audio channel you
connected on, Twittering questions and monitoring same. This didn't leave much
time for the nail biting, which was quite necessary as objections were
raised, clarifications mostly, and a question as to the category it should
be listed under - Critical Infrastructure or Capacity Building. But by the
end of the day thanks to Bertrand, Wolfgang, Marilia, the official chat
moderator (my apologies for not recording her name), Ginger, and Thomas
Schneider and Marilyn Cade (who may not be on this list), the excellent
moderation by Nitin Desai on Monday and Markus Kummer on Tuesday, and perhaps
others, the workshop was approved.
On Tuesday morning scheduling was to be the issue. I
arose and started connecting to the remote platform at 4:30, which is
when they'd finally started on Monday. As I was connecting I heard them
discussing workshop 50 - City TLDs. It was a bad connection - I should have
rebooted the 5 year old laptop - and needed to open a voice only participation
window. Someone was questioning why panel 50 was needed and "what are these City
TLDs, that's not an ICANN term?" I went quickly back to the nail biting as all
the channels were of no use during the heat of the discussion - I did use the
official chat feature but it seemed very ineffective for the discussion
underway. But Wolfgang, Bertrand, and Marilyn - possibly others - saved the
panel. A chat message I sent agreeing to the proposed modification (to
include an additional view on the panel) was referred to by the Markus Kummer in
closing debate.
The workshop survived and was scheduled for September 17 -
details above.
I'm writing to thank everyone who assisted the
workshops creation - those who agreed to be on the panel and those many in
Geneva who moved it through the Consultations, and to Eric (and others) who
sent mojo. I'd also like to note that I needed a better interface to
effectively participate in a remote event like this. For today I'll comment only
on needs on my end: An Event Screen that organizes the video,
scribe, platform chat, Twitter, and emails would be quite helpful. (Next year it
might be to include Facebook.) But it worked. I'm not sure how my emails,
tweets, and chats influenced the decision, but it was comforting to fell part of
the discussion.
With all this we're still 2+ months away from Vilnius
and the opportunity to actually do something worthwhile. I invite all of you to
tune your Event Screens to our workshop on September 17 and offer suggestions
prior.
Best,
Tom Lowenhaupt
----- Original Message -----
>From: Eric Dierker
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org ; Ginger Paque ; Thomas
> Lowenhaupt ; igf at unog.ch ; Marilia Maciel
>Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 12:29
> AM
>Subject: Re: [governance] Update on City
> TLD Governance and Best Practices
>
>
>Thomas,
>
>
>I am sending good intentions for your endeavor. Update when you
> have a chance this morning please?
>
>
>
________________________________
From: Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com>
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Thomas
> Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com>; igf at unog.ch; Marilia Maciel <mariliam at diplomacy.edu>
>Sent: Sun, June 27, 2010 1:07:59
> PM
>Subject: Re: [governance]
> Update on City TLD Governance and Best Practices
>
>Hi Thomas,
>I hope you have seen the email on remote
> participation details as your participation is important. If not, you or
> anyone else that is interested in RP should email me privately, please.
> Marilia Maciel will be present in Geneva, and handling remote moderation. I
> suggest you prepare a short 'intervention' and send it to her to be read, or
> arrange to read it yourself.
>
>It sounds like you have an excellent
> panel prepared. Have you written to igf at unog.ch (copied on this email) to ask for
> an update? Anything you can confirm before the meeting will facilitate the
> process.
>
>Good luck! Best, Ginger
>
>On 6/27/2010 3:16 PM,
> Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote:
>
> >>
>>With the IGF Vilnius Open
>> Consultation beginning tomorrow, here's an update on my efforts on behalf of
>> a proposed City TLD Governance and Best Practices Workshop. I'd
>> appreciate advice as to any steps I might take to facilitate its
>> acceptance.
>>
>>Over the past couple of
>> months I've contacted directly, and, via this and a few other lists, several
>> hundred people inviting participation on the City TLD Workshop. From an
>> expertise perspective, I've received confirmations from an
>> exceptional group. Listed in order of their acceptance,
>> the prospective participants are Wolfgang Kleinwächter, Dirk
>> Krischenowski, Bertrand de La Chapelle, Werner Staub, Thomas
>> Schneider, Hong Xue, Sébastien Bachollet, Hawa Diakite, Ana Cristina
>> Amoroso das Neves, Jonathan Shea (via remote participation), Izumi Aizu.
>>
>>
>>With my first in-person
>> participation on a TLD workshop having taken place at the 2006 Prague
>> Studienkreis, I knew there was enough expertise to make the panel
>> productive with the arrival of Wolfgang's acceptance. And as each new
>> one arrived, I saw layer upon later of expertise being added to the
>> workshop.
>>
>>I've also received a "Yes, if
>> it fits with my other panels" acceptance from a highly desired panelist. As
>> well, I've three outstanding invites: to someone from the U.S.
>> government to comment on the impact city TLDs might have on urban affairs,
>> particularly regionalization. If nothing comes through, perhaps an existing
>> panelist might comment on that. The New York City government's response, "if there
>> was a definite application filing time we would surely be able to arrange
>> something" might change if the ICANN timeline is clearer by September. The
>> third outstanding invite, to someone from the common pool resource
>> community, is one I'm very hopeful about getting a positive response.
>> Question: What is the status of the participant list going forward: can
>> it be changed, do I continue the pursuit?
>>
>>As we approach
>> Vilnius my plan is to reach out to global cities considering
>> TLDs, request questions and share these with panelists in preparation.
>>
>>
>>For
>> tomorrow's meeting, I'll be participating through the remote channels. I'd
>> appreciate any of you who will be in Geneva speaking up for
>> the City TLD workshop when appropriate. Beyond the fruitful topic and
>> great participants, you might point out we should have good technical
>> scores: reasonable geographic and gender balance and both
>> moderators at the ready.
>>
>>If you have a
>> question or feel I've missed something, please let me
>> know.
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>Tom Lowenhaupt
>>---------------------------
>>
>>Thomas Lowenhaupt, Founder &
>> Chair
>>Connecting.nyc Inc.
>>
>>tom at connectingnyc.org
>>Jackson Hts., NYC 11372
>>718
>> 639 4222
>>Web Wiki Blog
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100701/067827f5/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
More information about the Governance
mailing list