[governance] to whom Thanksgiving is an important celebration

shaila mistry shailam at yahoo.com
Wed Nov 24 12:58:22 EST 2010


Happy Thanksgiving to you!

I like Thanksgiving because it is one celebration that we can all celebrate 
together . 


 
Love and peace 
 
Shaila
 Life is too short ....challenge the rules
Forgive quickly ... love truly ...and tenderly
Laugh constantly.....and never stop dreaming! 



________________________________
From: Vanda UOL <vanda at uol.com.br>
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Sent: Wed, November 24, 2010 9:12:02 AM
Subject: [governance] to whom Thanksgiving is an important celebration


-Joy and fun, wish fulfillment and blessing, come to your home and the ones you 
love this Thanksgiving! 

 
 
Vanda Scartezini
Polo Consultores Associados
IT Trend
Alameda Santos 1470 – 1407,8
01418-903 São Paulo,SP, Brasil
Tel + 5511 3266.6253
Mob + 55118181.1464
 
 
-----Mensagem original-----
De: izumiaizu at gmail.com [mailto:izumiaizu at gmail.com] Em nome de Izumi AIZU
Enviada em: sexta-feira, 19 de novembro de 2010 13:42
Para: Governance List
Assunto: [governance] Fwd: Answers to the CSTD Questionnaire on improvements to 
the IGF
 
Just sent to the CSTD Secretariat and received the confirmation of their 
receipt.
 
Jeremy, please put it to our website when you have time to work.
 
Thanks all,
 
izumi
 
 
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org>
Date: 2010/11/20
Subject: Answers to the CSTD Questionnaire on improvements to the IGF
To: cstdwg-igf at unctad.org
Cc: Mongi Hamdi <Mongi.Hamdi at unctad.org>, Thomas.Schneider at bakom.admin.ch, 
frederic.riehl at bakom.admin.ch, Franziska Klopfer <Franziska.Klopfer at unctad.org>, 
Anne Miroux <Anne.Miroux at unctad.org>, Dong Wu <Dong.Wu at unctad.org>, Malou 
Pasinos <Malou.Pasinos at unctad.org>, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>
 
 
Nov 19 2010
 
Dear CSTD,
 
Here attached and following is the Answers to the CSTD Questionnaire on 
improvements to the IGF.
 
On behalf of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus, we submit them for 
the input to the coming consultation process.
 
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to participate in the process and we 
look forward to working with you in the coming consultation meeting on Nov 24 in 
Geneva and beyond.
 
Sincerely,
 
Izumi Aizu
Jeremy Malcolm
 
Co-coordinators,
Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)
 
-----------------
 
Answers to the CSTD Questionnaire on improvements to the IGF
 
Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus Nov 19 2010
 
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. These 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.
 
 
2. How satisfied are you with the delivery of the results of discussions at the 
IGF and the impact they have had on developments in national, regional or 
international Internet governance?
 
IGF has made a reasonable advancement of the understanding of the issues. Yet, 
at national, regional and international levels, we have mixed assessment for the 
impact it brought.
 
 
3. Which, if any, new mechanisms would you propose to improve the impact of the 
IGF discussions, in particular as regards the interaction between the IGF and 
other stakeholders? Please specify the kind of mechanism (e.g. reporting, 
exchanges, recommendations, concrete advice, etc.) and the stakeholders (e.g. 
intergovernmental bodies, other fora dealing with Internet Governance, etc.).
 
a) One mechanism we can suggest is to come up with some form of recommendations 
or messages where all stakeholders have [rough] consensus. They will not be 
binding, but could still function as model, reference or common framework. 
Working process towards achieving these rough consensus will create better and 
deeper understandings amongst different stakeholders.
 
 
b) The Secretariat and MAG should be strongly encouraged to directly foster 
discussion and debate of difficult issues in main sessions, instead of avoiding 
them.
 
4. In your view, what important new issues or themes concerning Internet 
governance have emerged or become important since the Tunis phase of the Summit, 
which deserve more attention in the next five years?
 
IGC feels that attention to the development agenda, issues concerning the 
marginalized groups or actors, have yet gained sufficient level of work at IGF 
and its outcome. These may not be the “new” issues, but we strongly feel they 
are very important.
 
Besides them, emergence of new technologies, tools and services, such as cloud 
computing; user-generated, SNS and online sharing services such as wiki, 
YouTube, Ustream, twitter and Facebook; DPI and behavioral targeting 
advertisements; wide deployment of mobile services including smart phones and 
tablet computers pose all kind of new challenges for governance.
 
 
5. What do you think should be the priority themes and areas of work of the IGF 
during the next five years?
 
Followings will be the areas of themes and works that have priorities we think.
 
a) Enhancing multi-stakeholder framework within IGF.
b) Promote capacity building for developmental agenda of governance
c) Balancing the interests – to empower those of marginalized and 
under-developed in all organizations and fora dealing with Internet governance – 
such as ICANN, W3C, IETF, RIRs, ITU, WIPO, CoE, OECD, UNCTAD/CSTD and United 
Nations itself.
 
6. How can the capacity of those groups that are not yet well represented at the 
IGF be improved? In particular, what could be done to improve the capacity of 
representatives from developing countries?
 
a) Establish special funding mechanism by IGF itself to help actors from 
developing countries to continuously engage in IGF and related organizations and 
meetings. Fellowship works carried out by DiploFoundation, dDotAsia 
Oorganizsation, Interne Society [other reference, please] and other institutions 
offer good reference for this, but they should be expanded in larger scale. 
Targeting youth groups or younger generation in profession, will have, in the 
long run, effective impact.
 
b) Providing technical training to policy makers and policy training to 
engineers will also help close the gap(s) within the under-represented and also 
even well-represented.
 
 
7. How do you think more awareness of Internet governance issues and the IGF 
process can be raised amongst groups whose lives are affected by Internet 
governance but who are not yet part of the IGF process?
 
a) Giving more weight to regional and national IGF meetings, making more direct 
“links” to the main IGF meeting will help outreach to those who have not yet 
involved in IGF process. Securing the same level of working framework of IGF, 
such as multi-stakeholder composition and inclusion of civil society groups 
(where such practice is relatively new or scarce) should be maintained.
 
b) Ensuring a plurality of civil society voices be heard in Internet governance 
processes will also be effective in reaching out to those yet to participate.
 
c) Online meetings are most effective when provision is made for participation 
both synchronously (ie. in real time) and asynchronously. The remote hubs and 
moderators at the Vilnius IGF made good progress towards this direction. Using 
such tools as blogs, Twitter, mailing lists, Facebook and so on over an extended 
period may also increase the awareness.
 
d) Organizing some sessions completely online will create “level playing field” 
among all participants, and may also demonstrate the effectiveness of these 
tools/technologies, and may also improve the quality of services in turn.
 
e) Increase linguistic diversity. Using UN major languages other than English at 
certain meetings and occasions as main working language (translated into other 
UN languages) will increase the outreach to non-English speaking population of 
the globe and will give more sense of ownership. Currently, English is the only 
default working language, but we think it does not have to be so.
 
 
8. How, if at all, do you think that the IGF process (including the format of 
the meeting, the preparatory process, the development of the agenda, etc.) needs 
to change to meet changing circumstances and priorities?
 
As we replied to the MAG questionnaire, the organizing work of IGF primarily by 
MAG should be improved. More outcome oriented direction might improve the 
quality and value of IGF, but this should be carefully exercised so as not to 
lose the open and free spirit of IGF which contributed a great deal.
 
9. Do you have any other comments?
 
Since we are still in the early stage of the consultation process, our comments 
include some tentative ideas. We will closely follow the WG process and will 
provide more comments and suggestions accordingly.
 
-----------------
____________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20101124/df73c3d7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3684 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20101124/df73c3d7/attachment.jpg>
-------------- 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