[governance] <important> Consensus Call for CSTD IGF Questionnaire

[Izumi AIZU]

Sorry for the confusion, and yes, the bold texts below are the deleted ones.
The text I pasted to my browser had the deletion marks, but when sent
to the list they are gone. And I don't know how to fix this (yet).

I will re-send the clean version in the next email.

thanks again,

izumi

2010/11/18 Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>

>  I’m a little confused Izumi and others might be as well. The email text
> of  your message below contains a couple of clauses which you have deleted
> in the final version of the document, (which can only be viewed as an
> attachment). But the email does not make clear to me that the bold text in
> your email message is  the  deleted text.
>
> However,  I support the statement made in the attached document.
>
> Ian Peter
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *Izumi Aizu <iza at anr.org>
> *Reply-To: *<governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Izumi Aizu <iza at anr.org>
> *Date: *Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:12:04 +0900
> *To: *<governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> *Subject: *[governance] <important> Consensus Call for CSTD IGF
> Questionnaire
>
> Dear list,
> Thank you for the comments on the 2nd Draft and here I made a few
> changes according to the comments. As this is our [rough] consensus
> text,* I have deleted the ones which received explicit
> objections/disagreement.
> *
> We need to know how many do support this final draft, how many
> are not happy with it with specific comments or reasons if any.
>
> Unfortunately, because I have not mastered how to create the online poll
> and Jeremy is not reachable at the moment, I would like to put
> the portions with changes below, attached the Word file for the
> full version, and call for Consensus.
>
> *Please reply to this thread.
> *
> As the deadline is Friday, Nov 19, that's tomorrow already here in Tokyo,
> we many not be able to wait for the full 48 hours, but hope it is Ok with
> you
> this time.
>
> Thank you for your support and understanding.
>
> izumi
>
> ----------------
>
> 1. What do you consider the most important achievements of the first five
> IGF meetings?
>
> IGF created the space for dialogue by *all* stakeholders in an open,
> inclusive manner. Th*is*ese emergence and development of the
> multistakeholder principle and practice are perhaps the biggest contribution
> IGF has achieved so far. It helped many participants to understand the
> issues of their interest, as well as to understand how other actors
> understand, act and accept their issues. Emergence of Regional and National
> IGF with multistakeholder approach is another achievement.*
> *
> * We also note that there are frustrations expressed that IGF process has
> not directly produced real tangible outcomes.
> *9.Do you have any other comments?
>
> *IGF must focus exclusively on public policy and governance issues. It
> should avoid providing standard educational workshops where some experts
> explain how to implement certain technologies or how these technologies
> work.
> *
> --------
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20101118/8bad5cf1/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