[governance] IGC on Facebook?
shaila mistry
shailam at yahoo.com
Wed Sep 7 12:54:58 EDT 2011
Hi Jeremy and Izumi and everyone
I have no objection to using FB for education and exposure to the work of IGF. However, perhaps we need to use a different platform, maybe a group on skype or google or even a closed group on FB so that there can be more comfortable debate amongst ourselves. Much of what we say is is within the context of our own involvement with IGF and within past history and relationships with one another. Sometimes statements made in haste within this context may be misunderstood by the wider community. Also we all like the right to be forgotten. I don't think FB will let us do that ! Like all of you I use FB extensively and know some of what it does with our info :)
cheers
Shaila
The journey begins sooner than you anticipate !
..................... the renaissance of composure !
________________________________
From: Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com>
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'Izumi AIZU' <iza at anr.org>
Cc: cveraq at gmail.com; 'Carlos A. Afonso' <ca at cafonso.ca>; 'Norbert Bollow' <nb at bollow.ch>; imran at igfpak.org
Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2011 6:02 AM
Subject: RE: [governance] IGC on Facebook?
Dear Izumi Aizu,
Thank you for your prompt reply. I have no objection on the FB group as on
experimentation or to share the information originated by the coordinators.
However, requested to review before publicizing the work or to open a
serious discussion on the FB group. You may continue your work with full
powers.
I just addressed the concern about the provisioning and dependencies for the
member in order to participate in the discussion on the FB group.
Thanking you and Best
Imran Ahmad Shah
-----Original Message-----
From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
Of Izumi AIZU
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 04:55 PM
To: ias_pk at yahoo.com
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; cveraq at gmail.com; Carlos A. Afonso; Norbert
Bollow; imran at igfpak.org
Subject: Re: [governance] IGC on Facebook?
Without the picture, I will respond to the points Imran raised.
2011/9/7 Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com>
>
> While I was reading the thread, discussion and the option you have
selected, I feel it necessary to highlight the other angle (dark side).
>
>
>
> When we create a group on facebook, we go through the following option
regarding features and types of groups whereas the Closed Group option is
one of them. Closed Group: anyone can see the group discussion but only
members can see the wall, discussion board and photos.
>
I think as a Closed Group, only the members can see the posts. Others can
see who are in it, but nothing more. Which might be a problem.
>
> As you have decided to start with the “Closed Group” of facebook, my
concern are as follows.
I have not "decided" to start with "Closed Group" on Facebook formally. I
created it as an experimental page, yes, but not a substantive one.
>
> 1. Well, once the group is created, the discussion of the IGC-CS
Members may be viewable for the public but in order to give some comments or
to participate in the discussion, IGC-CS Members has to sign up the Facebook
and join this closed group (with the admin’s approval i.e. the coordinators’
approval).
You can examine how this closed group works by trying to see it already
there, as experimental purpose only. If you have not joined, you will not be
able to see the content of the group.
And I have not made this group approved only by the admin. Any member can
invite and add any other friends.
> 2. Now my point is this that every IGC-CS Member has to sign up the
Facebook, and for this purpose we must need a full consensus to modify the
charter that the IGC-CS Members may also have to become the member of the
facebook group to participate in the discussion. And for this consensus, it
will be necessary to provide the awareness of the side effect of the
facebook type social network websites by mentioning their terms and
conditions that may have conflict in privacy and data integrity. Most
probably some or many of the IGC Member do not like to signup facebook
network or at least through their native or primary email address to protect
their data, contact and/or other information.
ONLY if we agree to make the Facebook page as a kind of formal place for
dialogue among IGC members, then yes, every CG IGC member has to sign up for
Facebook. And that will require consensus of our members. I think whether we
need to modify the Charter or not depends on how we propose and define the
use of this group. My intention has been not to make this FB page as formal
body of CS IGC, but rather a tool for outreach.
And, if our members do not like this idea, and instead like to start our own
social network or any other tool, I am completely open for it. But it again
depends on what exactly we want to achieve.
>
>
>
> 3. Otherwise, if the coordinators and/or any of the IGC-CS Member
like to enhance the projection of the IGC activities, they may be allowed to
publish final versions of related materials, reports and/or activities (but
not the raw discussion), on any other public blog/forum/social networking
site.
>
Yes, this is closer to what I am thinking.
> 4. According to review, current voting and comments in favor of
facebook are agreed on putting the IGC Activities or progress information
sharing for the millions of the facebook user. And that relates to above
mentioned item No.3 only.
OK.
My suggestion remains that within agreed framework, I like to start using FB
group as experimental.
There is no way to make it "secret". Either "open" or "closed" could be an
option.
However, I like to continue the discussion here online, as well as there at
Nairobi, before making any consensus call.
>
>
> I hope that your you will review my points thoroughly before opening or
publishing facebook close group.
Sorry, in a way, I have opened a closed group already, but it is just
experimenting the functions as I am not familiar with the use of FB. If you
all really feel not comfortable even with this "experimentation", please
comment so so that I may shut it down until we reach consensus.
I think "seeing is believing" and at this stage there is little risk for the
experimentation.
But I may be wrong ;-)
izumi
____________________________________________________________
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
____________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110907/ab5cac12/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