[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