[governance] CSTD IX. Conclusions and recommendations
Katitza Rodriguez
katitza at eff.org
Wed Jan 26 16:37:11 EST 2011
A short comment on this: We need to make sure that workshops are truly
multi-stakeholder and include the voice of civil society on it. I did
mentioned that in previous MAG meetings (and some business sector did in
fact include civil society in their workshops after our discussion).
However, it was not the case in all workshops. You also need several
people from civil society monitoring the different workshops proposals
classified by different themes, so you can identify a workshop that does
not include all voices.
Indeed, this suggestion of reviewing "workshop proposals to make sure
they meet quality, time constraints, and other organizational factors"
was made but unfortunately, many people do this in the last minutes and
many changes are held in the last minute, which I think is a bit
annoying. Especially if you bring new people to IGF, it seems IGF is
not well organized since people still changing things at the last
minute.. (a little chaotic) ;-) and outsiders just dont understand the
chaotic dynamics.
my two cents,
On 1/26/11 1:24 PM, Ginger Paque wrote:
> Marilia: 'Totally agree, Graciela. Sometimes it seems that workshop
> organizers are doing a favor in organizing workshops, therefore they
> should not be let down and face the refusal of their workshop proposals.'
>
> Ginger says: Marilia, I agree that we should recognize that workshop
> organizers do a lot of hard work as volunteers. However, this fact
> should be separated from the fact that workshop proposals should be
> reviewed to make sure they meet quality, time constraints, and other
> organizational factors. And of course merging of workshops should be
> carefully considered and only done when appropriate.
>
> I think these are two separate issues, both of which merit attention.
> Thanks for all your work.
> Ginger
>
> *
> **Ginger (Virginia) Paque
> *I
>
>
> On 1/26/2011 3:13 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>> Totally agree, Graciela. Sometimes it seems that workshop organizers
>> are doing a favor in organizing workshops, therefore they should not
>> be let down and face the refusal of their workshop proposals. This
>> has led to the merge of workshops that had very little in common and
>> ended up with ten, twelve spekers that could talk during 5 minutes.
>> This is totally contraproducive.
>>
>> There is no favor in organizing workshops. It is an opportunity to
>> promote meaningful debate, that should be enough. It is also a
>> responsibility, and workshop organizers need to be efficient and
>> accountable.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Marília
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Graciela Selaimen
>> <graciela at nupef.org.br <mailto:graciela at nupef.org.br>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the feedback, Jeannette. I wasn't in Vilnius,
>> unfortunately.
>> Your comment on the disappointment with the workshops' reports
>> makes me think that it's important to reflect not only how
>> workshops are organized but also why they are held. Perhaps it's
>> time to think of a way to give more meaning to workshops in the
>> IGF and to expect more commitment from workshop organizers in
>> formulating concrete messages as an outcome of these events - not
>> only formal, bureaucratic reports.
>>
>> graciela
>>
>> Em 1/26/11 3:51 PM, Jeanette Hofmann escreveu:
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 26.01.2011 13:18, schrieb Graciela Selaimen:
>>
>> Hi, Wolfganfg and all,
>>
>>
>> I am aware that this will trigger a debate about the
>> nomination of
>> chairs or rapporteurs. However the message from a
>> workshop could be
>> "one group says so and the other group says so". The
>> message in this
>> case would be: This is an important issue, but there
>> is no agreement.
>> And if you have 60 workshops you would have 60
>> rapporteurs (with about
>> 150 messages) which guarantees to a certain degree
>> diversity and a
>> fair reflection of all positions.
>>
>>
>> This is why I think it would be interesting to have the
>> workshops in the
>> two first days of the meeting. Their messages could be
>> the main input
>> for the plenary sessions; the moderators of the main
>> sessions would have
>> to work together with rapporteurs of the workshops in
>> order to focus the
>> sessions on the presentation and discussion of the
>> messages and this
>> would make these sessions really linked to the workshops
>> - something
>> that we've been highlighting as desirable for years...
>>
>>
>> That is exactly what we did at the Vilnius meeting. For
>> critical Internet resources, workshops were scheduled for the
>> first day so that they would take place before the main
>> session. Personally, I didn't find the result convincing. So
>> far, our experience with reporting from workshop have been
>> somewhat disappointing. I don't know exactly why. Perhaps the
>> summaries lacked a bit of the excitement we were hoping for :-)
>>
>> jeanette
>>
>>
>> my 2 cents,
>>
>> graciela
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> governance at lists.cpsr.org <mailto: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
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> governance at lists.cpsr.org <mailto: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
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> governance at lists.cpsr.org <mailto: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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
>> FGV Direito Rio
>>
>> Center for Technology and Society
>> Getulio Vargas Foundation
>> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
--
Katitza Rodriguez
International Rights Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
katitza at eff.org
katitza at datos-personales.org (personal email)
Please support EFF - Working to protect your digital rights and freedom of speech since 1990
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110126/8925a2d7/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, 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
More information about the Governance
mailing list