[governance] Results of poll and the two IGF speeches
Mawaki Chango
kichango at gmail.com
Fri Sep 10 16:26:05 EDT 2010
Glad to hear that clarification, Avri. I was a little troubled at the idea
that we'd be down to a lottory for the *choice* of speakers by the IGF
Secretariat --which would have made our polling completely useless, and no
sense!
Mawaki
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeup, apologies for missing that part and thanks to Avri for reminding
> that!
>
> -- Fouad
>
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 10:06 PM, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > If I may be permitted a comment on this note.
> >
> > The names are set and are posted on the web site for both the opening and
> the closing.
> >
> > It is the order of speakers that will be subject to a lot drawing.
> >
> > a.
> >
> > On 10 Sep 2010, at 22:35, Fouad Bajwa wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I have come to learn that due to a large number of responses and
> interest, the IGF Secretariat will also hold a draw for selecting the names
> of various people to speak in the opening and closing sessions of the IGF to
> maintain transparency at their end and have invited whoever can be present
> at 15:00hrs on the 13th of September 2010 in the main venue in Vilnius to
> participate in the draw and help draw the names in the open ballot ;o)
> >>
> >> It also remains that we are not the only ones that are invited to
> propose names!
> >>
> >> I also second Bertrand's suggestion.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Bertrand de La Chapelle <
> bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Dear Jeremy, dear all,
> >>
> >> I think the co-coordinators make perfect sense. and the poll method has
> been very useful as a thermometer. Regarding the topics, some suggestions :
> >>
> >> - I suggest that when drafting the speeches, you use the ranking of the
> various themes not as indication of some been kept and others dropped but
> rather as an indication of the length of the paragraphs that should be
> devoted to each : all issues are worth mentioning and the fact that gender
> for instance only has 12 % does not prevent from making a short paragraph
> about it (because it is indeed important); having two speeches allows to
> cover most ground
> >> - it would probably be interesting to focus the opening on the more
> substantive topics (UDHR, and most of the "novel ones", even if IANA or net
> neutrality are not completely new) in order to produce food for thought for
> the rest of the week. As you've often heard me say, the best way to get
> consensus in the IGC and to have a positive impact in the discussions is to
> focus on the framing of each problem and fundamental principles rather than
> advocating for a specific solution (as in many cases CS is not of a uniform
> voice). Ginger would probably be best for the opening
> >> - the closing session could focus more on procedural issues and looking
> forward at the future of the IGF (continuation, "improvements"), the need to
> preserve certain fundamental operational principles and more generally the
> role of the different stakeholders, in particular civil society in the
> upcoming enhanced cooperation discussions. Given his keen interest in those
> topics, I suppose Jeremy would be the most suited to it. It also leaves some
> time during the IGF to polish the positionning (on site and online) and take
> into account some of the comments and discussions that will take place.
> Please do not forget to include the item "congratulating the IGF" along
> possible recommendations for change. Even if there is ample room for
> improvement, this is still a fragile experiment that deserves some
> protection and has established (as wolfgang rightly highlighted) a pattern
> of interaction unavailable anywhere else.
> >>
> >> I hope this helps and trusts that we'll have a good IGF.
> >>
> >> Looking forward to seeing many of you soon.
> >>
> >> Best
> >>
> >> Bertrand
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 3:24 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>
> wrote:
> >> The results are as follows. 128 responses were received, 117 in full
> and the balance in part (ie. only one of the two questions), from 463
> invitations sent. This is a response rate of 27.6%, which is reasonable by
> IGC standards, bearing in mind that some people are subscribed twice or more
> under different addresses, and that we have some lurkers, eg. from the IGF
> Secretariat, who do not participate in the IGC's consensus decision-making.
> >>
> >> I'll take the results question by question. On the first question,
> there was a clear enough view that Ginger and I, as the IGC coordinators,
> should take the opening and closing slots; this was also the only choice
> supported by more than half the respondents. Parminder and Wolfgang were
> next most common choices. Karen Banks and Valeria Betancourt were the women
> who received the most support, though with less than one third of
> respondents for either of them.
> >>
> >> Therefore I will be recommending to the IGF Secretariat that Ginger and
> I speak. If they do not agree with this, then I will suggest that Parminder
> and Valeria speak (although Karen received equal support, Valeria pips Karen
> on geographical diversity - sorry Karen).
> >>
> >> Here are the percentage breakdowns for the first question (sorry, this
> may look bad if your email program doesn't support HTML):
> >>
> >> Which four names should be put forward as civil society speakers?
> >> Answer Count Percentage
> >> Fouad Bajwa (a) 33 25.78%
> >> Fatimata Seye Sylla (b) 28 21.88%
> >> Valeria Betancourt (c) 36 28.12%
> >> Wolfgang Kleinwachter (d) 55 42.97%
> >> Parminder Jeet Singh (e) 64 50.00%
> >> Co-coordinators (Jeremy Malcolm and Ginger Paque) (f) 75 58.59%
> >> Karen Banks (g) 36 28.12%
> >> Ben Akoh (h) 17 13.28%
> >> Katitza Rodriguez (i) 32 25.00%
> >> Marilia Maciel (available for opening only) (j) 33 25.78%
> >>
> >> On the second question, the most popular answer was "Involvement of
> civil society in enhanced cooperation model for Internet governance". There
> are five other answers that were also clearly more popular than the others:
> the development dimension of IG, the retention of the IGF's core
> characteristics, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the
> desirability of improving inclusion and participation, and the desirability
> that the IGF continue to evolve and innovate.
> >>
> >> Leaving aside "Other", there were only three questions that received
> support from less than a third of respondents: congratulating the IGF on its
> successes, the gender dimension and the role of dynamic coalitions. So
> leaving these aside, all of the available choices of theme were quite
> popular.
> >>
> >> Here is the complete breakdown of responses to the second question:
> >>
> >> What are the top five themes to suggest the speakers address in their
> presentations?
> >> Answer Count Percentage
> >> Congratulating the IGF (on the completion of its first term, its
> innovative structure, etc.) (a) 32 25.00%
> >> Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Internet (b) 65
> 50.78%
> >> Development dimension of Internet governance (c) 70 54.69%
> >> Involvement of civil society in enhanced cooperation model for Internet
> governance (d) 78 60.94%
> >> Retention of IGF's core characteristics (multistakeholderism, openness,
> consultative program shaping processes) (e) 68 53.12%
> >> Desirability that IGF continue to evolve and innovate as necessary,
> within its non-binding mandate (f) 54 42.19%
> >> Gender dimension of Internet governance (g) 16 12.50%
> >> Desirability of improving inclusion and participation (including remote
> participation) at the IGF (h) 57 44.53%
> >> Role of dynamic coalitions (i) 24 18.75%
> >> Non-negotiated outputs such as "messages from" or "recommendations at"
> the IGF (j) 37 28.91%
> >> Other 10 7.81%
> >>
> >> Of the ten "Other" responses, four link in with other available answers:
> >>
> >> • Desirability that IGF continue to evolve and innovate as
> necessary, with a modified mandate to give its outputs more weight [an
> extended version of answer (f)]
> >> • An articulated, hierarchical scheme for producing consensus
> "messages" or "recommendations" [an extended version of answer (j)]
> >> • Consideration of a more serious role in global net gov
> policymaking, building on first 5 years of talk shop [an extension of
> answers (f) and (j)]
> >> • All of these are obviously important... hopefully we can work
> all of the ideas in - e.g. combine those around IGF characteristics,
> enhanced cooperation and continuation of IGF [links answers (a) to (j).
> >>
> >> The other six are more or less novel:
> >>
> >> • ICANN review and IANA contract
> >> • Increased involvement of developing country participants in
> shaping the agenda of the IGF, greater role for regional and national
> meetings in shaping the IGF rather than the MAG
> >> • Network neutrality, privacy and communication freedom over the
> Internet
> >> • Importance of an open and accessible Internet
> >> • A Review Report (from CS) on MAG Responsibilities vs
> Accountability w.r.t. UNSG mandate (which global issues resolved or what
> challenges handled by IGF MAG at Global Challenges for Internet Global
> Level)
> >> • Free Software - Free Knowledge
> >>
> >> So, it appears likely that Ginger and I will speak, and that we will
> focus on the themes that received the greatest support - whilst trying to at
> least touch on most of them. Ginger has offered to speak first, and will
> cover "involvement of civil society in enhanced cooperation process".
> >>
> >> Graphs of these results are available on our Web site at
> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/37. The exact results of "who voted for
> what" will also be put online in due course. If you want to see them now, I
> can send you the raw data files and you can pore through them at your
> leisure.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jeremy Malcolm
> >> Project Coordinator
> >> Consumers International
> >> Kuala Lumpur Office for Asia Pacific and the Middle East
> >> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur,
> Malaysia
> >> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
> >>
> >> CI is 50
> >> Consumers International marks 50 years of the global consumer movement
> in 2010.
> >> Celebrate with us as we continue to support, promote and protect
> consumer rights around the world.
> >> http://www.consumersinternational.org/50
> >>
> >> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless
> necessary.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> 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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> ____________________
> >> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> >> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
> Information Society
> >> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of
> Foreign and European Affairs
> >> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
> >>
> >> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de
> Saint Exupéry
> >> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> 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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards.
> >> --------------------------
> >> Fouad Bajwa
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
>
>
> --
> Regards.
> --------------------------
> Fouad Bajwa
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20100910/2871a296/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