[governance] No concluding ending for CSTD WG to IGF improvement

[Norbert Bollow]

William Drake <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch> wrote:

> On Mar 27, 2011, at 8:53 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
> 
> > In other words, other than for the non-governmental stakeholders this
> > process was not really about IGF improvements, but about the IGF being a
> > stage for other plays.
> 
> Alas, this seems to say it all.  Is there any reason to think this
> will change?  If not, what alternatives should we begin to think
> about?

Organize a working-group consisting of everyone who truly wants to
improve the IGF, and have this working-group create a good WGIG-style
report.

The UN had the opportunity to do this, and failed. This creates the
opportunity for another actor to act as convenor of a significant
multistakeholder WG now.

Greetings,
Norbert
____________________________________________________________
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