[governance] What next with the IGF Improvement?

[McTim]

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 09:53 +0300, McTim wrote:
>> I think the tack I would take is that because there is a conflict
>> between those who want outputs and those who want to focus on capacity
>> building, the IGF spends too much time and energy on discussing
>> itself, and not enough time doing its main purpose, which is capacity
>> building.  If workshops actually focused on teaching folk instead of
>> "shape of the table" issues it could be very useful indeed.
>
> I would have said the opposite.  Any old conference can do capacity
> building;

not when the vast majority of time is spent navel-gazing!


this is the IGF's least important function in my view.  Not
> any conference can do multi-stakeholder deliberation on Internet policy
> issues.  And I think the IGF spends too little time discussing
> institutional issues, which is why neither our Indian workshop proposal
> nor the mapping proposal fit within any of the substantive themes.

I think the mapping workshop could be used to steer ppl to the
appropriate fora, take the case of my earlier post to MM, how many
folk attending IGF know or could describe accurately the global
framework for IP addressing policies?? I would venture to guess very
few.  Education is what is needed, not rhetoric.


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t