[governance] Re: Survey Results Out [IGC Consultations]

Imran Ahmed Shah ias_pk at yahoo.com
Mon Feb 20 05:12:42 EST 2012 

Please also note that the provisioning of the Working Groups at Working Groups Page are representing wrong image as stated "inactive" and when click on them, it returned "Page not found". 	* IGC outreach working group (inactive)
	* IGC strategy working group (inactive)
	* IGC work-plan working group (inactive)
	* IGC charter review working group
	* IGC working group for CSTD issues (inactive)
 
Even, if there has been endorsed a disclaimer that "these groups do not have any formal authority under the IGC charter" , I would recommend to update these pages to inlude the list of the members of these WG till a certain date. As I remember, when the Working Groups were formed, the some of the members joined different WG.
 
So, the viewer of the IGC site/page would understand easily that who is the memebr of these WGs.
 
Thanks
 
Imran Ahmed Shah


>________________________________
>From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>
>To: Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> 
>Cc: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>; "Imran @IGFPak.org" <imran at igfpak.org> 
>Sent: Monday, 20 February 2012, 15:04
>Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Survey Results Out [IGC Consultations]
>
>Thanks Imran. As promised your comments on the Charter review has been
>forwarded to Jeremy who is part of the Charter Review.
>
>Have a great day!
>Sala
>
>On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 9:55 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Dear Sala,
>> With reference to following suggestions for which (I think) you have tried
>> to convince me about existence of the provisioning of time relaxation etc...
>> I did not mentioned any single instance or case. So, there was no needed to
>> explain.
>>
>> I submitted these suggestions to follow onward by the IGC-CS as the
>> good/common practices and as a tradition (you can also say SOP).
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Imran Ahmed Shah
>>
>> From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>
>> To: Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com>
>> Cc: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>; "Imran
>> @IGFPak.org" <imran at igfpak.org>
>> Sent: Monday, 20 February 2012, 12:37
>> Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Survey Results Out [IGC Consultations]
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Coordinators and All Members
>>
>>
>> Thank you Imran for taking the time to give the list feedback and
>> recommendations. They are much appreciated. Some comments are inline.
>>
>> With reference to the context; discussion and objections on designing and
>> conducting the Survey for a common statement and Balloting for voting my
>> recommendations are as follows:
>>
>> 1.    Prior to conduct any survey/ balloting, the Mailing List and Voting
>> members should be intimated in-time and encouraged and asked to suggest that
>> what items should be (and/or what should not be) inclusive in the survey
>> and/or ballot.
>>
>> The Charter creates an exception for the waiver of the 48 hour rule, I have
>> highlighted the relevant bits see below:
>>
>> "The IGC will work on the basis of consensus as much as is possible. When
>> complete consensus cannot be reached the coordinators will be jointly
>> empowered to call rough consensus. Rough consensus, for the purposes of the
>> IGC, is defined as the point at which an overwhelming majority of the IGC
>> appears to agree with a position with any dissenting minority view having
>> been well discussed and respected. Rough consensus can only be called after
>> a serious attempt has been made to accommodate minority points of view.
>>
>> When both coordinators agree that it is necessary to make a rough consensus
>> call, the coordinator will announce the text of the consensus decision on
>> the mailing list and allow for at least fourty eight (48) hours of final
>> discussion. As discussed under the role of the appeals team, a rough
>> consensus call can be appealed to the appeals team.
>> Statements and representation at meetings.
>>
>> Normally, whenever there is sufficient time for a statement to be discussed
>> and approved by the caucus as a whole, the decision procedure outlined above
>> will be required. However, there will be occasions when members of the
>> caucus will be attending meetings and will be presented with the opportunity
>> to make statements that require a very quick response. In these cases, while
>> it is still required that the caucus be informed of an upcoming statement
>> and its contents as soon as possible the following rule may be applied when
>> necessary:
>> The coordinators will act as the official representatives of the caucus and
>> will be responsible for approving any statement that cannot be discussed by
>> the caucus within the time available.
>> In the case of face-to-face meetings, they will also coordinate with the
>> members of the IGC who are present. Any statement should reflect the assumed
>> general thinking of the caucus, rather than just that of those members who
>> are physically present at the meeting.
>> If neither of the IGC coordinators can be physically present in face-to-face
>> meetings, they will delegate coordination to another participant of such
>> events. This delegation should, if possible, be made before the meeting and
>> with the advice of the caucus.
>> Statements and positions on behalf of the caucus will be prepared and
>> coordinated by the coordinators, or their delegate as appropriate.
>> Such statements will reflect the vision, objectives and basic principles of
>> Civil Society in general, and the IGC in particular. Such statements will
>> try to interpret, in good faith, the assumed general thinking of the caucus,
>> based on past discussions and documents, and should not contradict the
>> positions taken by the caucus in the past.
>> Such statements will be sent to the IGC as soon as possible, preferably
>> before being presented, but if that is impossible, then as soon after their
>> presentation as possible.
>>
>>
>> 2.    Survey should have some additional input fields to provide more
>> opportunities to obtain inputs and ideas for every kind and every level of
>> users while they are attempting to answer limited pre-written fields.
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>> 3.    During the survey/ balloting the user should be provided with the
>> option to disagree with all of the contents, overall theme or the list of
>> candidate to vote for. In case of disagreement, user may be provided fields
>> (text box) to endorse the statement and reason of the conflict or
>> disagreement.
>>
>> I cannot comment on the balloting but you can raise that with the Charter
>> Review Working Group. However in relation to the Survey, absolutely. This
>> was provided through the No Option and "Alternative Suggestion" Text option
>> where people could give their comments and some people did use this.
>>
>> 4.   The conflicts, disagreements and/or submitting alternate ideas, inputs
>> should also be considered while preparing the final report.
>> If you read the report, we did not amend nor vary people's comments but
>> placed them as they were answered in the fields. Diversity of ideas is
>> important and fully agree. However, if one does not participate, one's views
>> is not factored in. I have discovered that the IGC website has its own lime
>> survey so we will be using this in the future.
>>
>>
>>
>> With reference to the modification in the IGC Charter,
>>
>>
>> I will forward your comments on Charter modification to the Working Group
>> that is looking into this. I will not comment on Charter modification until
>> the WG has carried out its review and asks for public comments from the
>> list. Suffice to say there is a working group that is reviewing the Charter.
>> If you are not already a member and desire to be a part it, feel free to
>> send Jeremy an email to join.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanking you and Best Regards
>> Imran Ahmed Shah
>>
>> From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>
>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> Sent: Monday, 20 February 2012, 4:18
>> Subject: [governance] Re: Survey Results Out [IGC Consultations]
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I would like to apologise to the list for the shortcomings of the Survey
>> that was carried out and solely take full responsibility. In the future to
>> ensure that these shortcomings are confined, I will use the
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/limesurvey
>>
>> This will mean that each member will actually get the form sent to your
>> account with your name on it. I also thank Avri and Chris for raising the
>> shortcomings of the poll.
>>
>> Sala
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> We are pleased to announce the results of the Survey that was held recently.
>> The Survey is attached. We thank all who participated.
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Fatima Cambronero, Izumi Aizu and Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>>
>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> Cell: +679 998 2851
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>>
>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> Cell: +679 998 2851
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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
>>
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
>Tweeter: @SalanietaT
>Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120220/ff17bcfb/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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