[governance] Remote Participation
Avri Doria
avri at acm.org
Fri Feb 24 19:11:38 EST 2012
Hi,
Does this drafting effort have an editor who is trying to massage it all into a coherent statement? I.e someone holding the proverbial pen?
I recommend finding such a volunteer. I can't volunteer this time - though I will in the future for some other effort if we adopt such a habit, as I am already up to my ears in writing projects and am losing track of the proverbial pens I currently hold.
avri
On 24 Feb 2012, at 18:51, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> Thanks everyone how do you all propose to reach a compromise between what Adam raised and others are raising. Please make suggestions to drafting language in the Statement Workspace, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/47
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Avri Doria <avri at ella.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I agree with what has been said in this thread by the past few writers.
>
> I used to not beleive in having a Remote only meeting, but now I think I do.
> I tried to participate in meetings remotely and found it to be a near total failure. I am live in a bandwidth rich zone.
>
> Plus even when it works technically it does not work in a practical sense unless the chair, the secretariat, the remote moderator and the other participants actually make a concerted allowance for it. And I do not think I have ever seen in a case where everyone was making allowance.
>
> The best it ever was, was when the RCWG was doing all the work, and they really had to work hard to make it even resemble particpation.
>
> avri
>
>
>
>
> On 24 Feb 2012, at 18:20, Deirdre Williams wrote:
>
> > I also support what Ginger and Marilia and Anriette are saying.
> > What I could possibly want more is a system that works rather than an intention on paper. I hope this is not too blunt but sometimes I feel that 'people' are saying "remote participation is a good thing", and then just stopping there. An excellent ploy might be to have just one meeting remote access only - so that everyone knows how the other side lives.
> > And I think that we all need to fight for it to make it 'really real'. Yes there will be breakdowns - electrical and otherwise - and yes we're only just scratching the surface of the language difficulties, but if we believe in it we can really make it happen.
> > Only we have to believe in it and support it - all of us.
> > Deirdre
> >
> > On 24 February 2012 19:04, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:
> > Hi all..at two of the workshops I was involved in in Nairobi RM did not
> > work.. either not at all, or partially. IN the last few months I have
> > had bad experiences in trying to be a remote participant in Geneva based
> > meetings. When my slow connection speed from South Africa interfered
> > with my access to the meeting I was blamed for this.. and told that
> > other people had no problems (they happened to be in Paris and Rio..
> > places with much faster internet than what I have access to).
> >
> > As for the MAG meetings last week.. I personally spoke to IGF
> > secretariat about the difficulties that remote participants were having
> > in the morning. There was no improvement because the person responsible
> > was having to take notes that were displayed from his PC onto the
> > screen. I raised the concerns on the last day directly, during lunch,
> > with the Chair from Azerbaidjan and with the Chair and then there was a
> > response.
> >
> > But, if RM was taken seriously enough then more resoures would have been
> > made available. I am not blaming the secretariat.. they were stretched
> > and doing the best they can. The problem is deeper than just this one
> > incident.
> >
> > I strongly support Ginger's points, and Marilia's additions. RM has to
> > be taken MUCH more seriously if it is going to be a serious way for
> > people to participate, and influence processes, without being physically
> > present.
> >
> > RM is beginning to feel like MSP (Multi-stakeholder participation). The
> > fact that it 'exists' is used to give credibility to processes that
> > still have a very long way to go in being really inclusive. If RM is to
> > be taken seriously it needs more focus and more budget. As long as RM is
> > seen primarily as a way to 'save money and look good' it will not be
> > effective as an alternative to having generally excluded actors
> > physically present at meetings.
> >
> > Anriette
> >
> >
> > On 24/02/12 22:00, Marilia Maciel wrote:
> > > I support Ginger's e-mail, so I will not repeat her arguments.
> > >
> > > There is only one additional point I would like to make in response to
> > > Adam, when he quoted what the Chair's report said about remote
> > > participation. While it is totally understandable that people who happen
> > > to be working for the IGF will come up with positive results and be
> > > inclined to see the bright side of things, I believe that civil society
> > > is expected to present more meaningful, in-depth and constructive
> > > analysis of the process, including of remote participation.
> > >
> > > The difficulties remote participants faced went beyond a simple power
> > > shortage on the last day of the IGF, as you implied. Technical and human
> > > resources were not sufficient. This is exemplified by: simple audio
> > > adjustments that technicians did not know how to perform, or by the fact
> > > that the hired staff of remote moderators you mentioned were on strike
> > > on the first day of the IGF because they were not receiving enough money
> > > to cover for basic expenses at the venue, or even by the fact that some
> > > workshop organizers, despite all the requests from the secretariat, did
> > > not bother to reply if they had a moderator or not.
> > >
> > > So the fact that remote participation is a priority on IGF papers, as
> > > you pointed out, says little. You asked Deidre "what she could possibly
> > > want more". If you read Ginger's e-mail you will find a list of wishes.
> > > And if the community thinks RP is important (and I think that the
> > > increasing interest for remote participation confirms it is ), then we
> > > should make a collective effort to take the opportunity of the process
> > > of discussing the implementation of IGF improvements to give RP a big push.
> > >
> > > Marília
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com
> > > <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Adam said:
> > >
> > > I think it's petty to complain about technical problems with the
> > > transcripts etc from the MAG meeting, bad connections happen all the
> > > time (and if MAG members can't work out how to tell a group of people
> > > they are having problems with a connection it perhaps says more about
> > > them than it does about the secretariat/moderators.)
> > >
> > > I think that this full discussion and support for RP is very
> > > important and exciting.
> > >
> > > I think that using the occasion of the recent meetings as an example
> > > and illustration is a mistake. I agree with Adam that the tech
> > > glitches during last week's meetings should not even be
> > > addressed--these are obvious. Placing emphasis on tech details draws
> > > attention from the more valid, and more important principles. I know
> > > I am repeating myself, but I think they boil down to just one:
> > >
> > > RP must be institutionalized in meeting processes.
> > >
> > > The only serious problem I see with last week's meetings was the
> > > lack of a remote moderator and clear processes. If RP -- and I mean
> > > remote participation and remote engagement, not remote observation
> > > -- were an automatic, standard part of meeting strategies and
> > > processes, the inclusion of an onsite remote moderator would have
> > > been a given, as much as the presence of the traditional chair and
> > > moderator. I dare to say that if one of the members of the RPWG had
> > > been at the meetings, they might have 'requested' to be 'allowed' to
> > > act as remote moderator. Remote moderation and remote participation
> > > should not depend on collaboration of volunteers and serendipity.
> > > Implementation of RP may always need the collaboration of
> > > volunteers, and the RPWG exists as a volunteer organization, seeking
> > > the privilege of collaborating, but the planning process should
> > > originate in the IGF structure itself, not in the action of volunteers.
> > >
> > > If RP were institutionalized in the IGF process, the Secretariat
> > > might ask the RPWG for collaboration, and issue a call for volunteers.
> > >
> > > If RP were institutionalized in the IGF process, the Secretariat
> > > might include a RPWG (or other mechanism) liaison for strategy,
> > > planning and process and instead of an endless series of ad hoc
> > > situations.
> > >
> > > If RP were institutionalized, Remote Hubs -- an innovation of the
> > > RPWG catalysed by Marilia's energy and organization -- would become
> > > part of the IGF process, not the RPWG process, would include remote
> > > hubs whenever appropriate and would include support for regional IGFs.
> > >
> > > I would prefer to see a strong, clear, short statement asking that
> > > RP be institutionalised (maybe that is not the appropriate word) as
> > > an integral part of the IGF meeting process.
> > >
> > > Establishing principles and guidelines is separate process which has
> > > been started, and should be coordinated to take advantage of, and
> > > include the different input. It should not be done in a hurry, in
> > > response to one frustrating meeting. Nor should one frustrating
> > > meeting opaque the progress the IGF has made toward inclusive RP. We
> > > should use this meeting to energize forward progress in an orderly
> > > manner. Can we form a better strategy and focus for productive
> > > results? I think so. I have not made comments on the existing
> > > statement, because I would re-write it completely, with a different
> > > approach, with points I have made above.
> > >
> > > Is it proper/possible for me to propose an alternate text? I do not
> > > have the sense that there is consensus for the posts I have made
> > > previously, so I have not done so.
> > >
> > > Anyway, again, my 2 cents. Cheers for the energy around remote
> > > participation!
> > >
> > > Ginger
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Ginger (Virginia) Paque
> > >
> > > VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu <mailto:VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu>
> > > Diplo Foundation
> > >
> > > Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme
> > > www.diplomacy.edu/ig <http://www.diplomacy.edu/ig>
> > > /The latest from Diplo..../From the fundamentals of diplomacy to the
> > > most exciting new trends: check our three online courses starting in
> > > May 2012: *Bilateral Diplomacy*, *Diplomacy of Small States*, and
> > > *E-diplomacy*. Apply now to reserve your place:
> > > http://www.diplomacy.edu/courses*//*
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 23 February 2012 05:13, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp
> > > <mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Comment below:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
> > > <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com
> > > <mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > > Dear All,
> > > >
> > > > Firstly thank you Deirdre for copying it onto word and making
> > > it much easier
> > > > to incorporate the new feedback that we received from Schombe,
> > > Jovan,
> > > > Anriette, Jeremy, Roland, Mariela etc.
> > > >
> > > > Whilst I am copying the text onto this email, I will also
> > > place it on the
> > > > Statement Workspace as well:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > STATEMENT BY THE CIVIL SOCIETY INTERNET GOVERNANCE CAUCUS ON
> > > REMOTE
> > > > PARTICIPATION
> > > >
> > > > We would like to acknowledge the excellent work that the
> > > Internet Governance
> > > > Forum Remote Participation Working Group have been doing over
> > > the last five
> > > > years. We appreciate the numerous hours of sacrifice and work
> > > behind the
> > > > scenes to build remote participation to what it is today. We
> > > have seen how
> > > > whilst Technology is important, that it goes hand in hand with
> > > extraordinary
> > > > levels of sacrifice and commitment. It is this commitment
> > > that enables the
> > > > spirit of the IGF which is in sharing, dialogue, collaboration and
> > > > ultimately access.
> > > >
> > > > We are fortunate that the Internet Governance Forum
> > > Secretariat and UN DESA
> > > > are open .and committed to continued improvements to Remote
> > > Participation.
> > > > Each year the IGF RPWG commences its operations with training
> > > of remote
> > > > moderators many weeks ahead of the meeting, where they discuss
> > > with remote
> > > > hubs and encourage participation and liaise with the
> > > Secretariat to make
> > > > remote participation a reality.
> > > >
> > > > We would like to reiterate and underscore that remote
> > > participation is a
> > > > crucial part of organizing the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)
> > > and we
> > > > appreciate the effort to provide remote participation for the Open
> > > > Consultation, the Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (MAG)
> > > meetings, and the
> > > > MAG meeting this month – February 2012 – which was opened to
> > > observers.
> > > >
> > > > The IGC believes that Remote Participation (RP) should be an
> > > integral part
> > > > of Internet Governance and IGF Policy Processes. It is
> > > impossible to sustain
> > > > an inclusive global policy process without effective remote
> > > participation.
> > > > We would like to explore how we can assist in working together
> > > to address
> > > > the issues raised in 2008 by various stakeholders that have
> > > yet to be
> > > > addressed[1].
> > > >
> > > > The MAG and IGF Secretariats should start working with the
> > > host to ensure
> > > > that real time transcriptions are available for all sessions
> > > and not just
> > > > the Main Sessions.
> > > >
> > >
> > > from the Nairobi chair's summary document:
> > >
> > > "The entire meeting was Webcast, with video streaming provided from
> > > the main session room and audio streaming provided from all workshop
> > > meeting rooms. All the main sessions and workshops had real time
> > > transcription. The text transcripts and video of all meetings were
> > > made available through the IGF Website."
> > >
> > > I think it's petty to complain about technical problems with the
> > > transcripts etc from the MAG meeting, bad connections happen all the
> > > time (and if MAG members can't work out how to tell a group of
> > > people
> > > they are having problems with a connection it perhaps says more
> > > about
> > > them than it does about the secretariat/moderators.)
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Adam
> > >
> > >
> > > > We would like to commend the excellent work of the technical
> > > team from
> > > > Politecnico di Torino, (The Polytechnic University of Turin)
> > > which was
> > > > originally brought by our colleague and former IGC Civil
> > > Society Coordinator
> > > > Vittorio Bertola.
> > > >
> > > > However, we would like to point out some difficulties that
> > > occurred with the
> > > > system during the open MAG meeting. On the third day, morning
> > > session, (the
> > > > second day of the open MAG meeting), remote observers were
> > > effectively
> > > > excluded because they had no access to live transcript.
> > > >
> > > > Also MAG members trying to participate online had difficulty
> > > in contacting
> > > > moderators, partly because the moderators were serving more
> > > than one
> > > > function.
> > > >
> > > > We strongly urge MAG and IGF Secretariats and ourselves to
> > > consider the
> > > > following for the future IGF organizing work and the IGF
> > > itself, and work
> > > > together to bring them about:
> > > >
> > > > · Ensuring equal participation between online and offline
> > > participants
> > > > through planning meetings to give online and offline
> > > participants an equal
> > > > opportunity to participate and contribute to meetings.
> > > >
> > > > · Ensuring that there is sufficient capacity and appropriate
> > > bandwidth to
> > > > sustain remote participation by liaising with hosts well in
> > > advance to
> > > > enable greater interactions from offline participants.
> > > >
> > > > · Preparing a clear comprehensive guideline for remote
> > > participation and
> > > > its moderation and post session or meeting reporting for
> > > meeting hosts,
> > > > facilitators and chairs.
> > > >
> > > > · Clearly advertising opportunities for RP in advance of all
> > > meetings,
> > > > with clear guidance for participants on the opportunities to
> > > engage through
> > > > RP that will be available.
> > > >
> > > > ·Always assigning exclusive remote participation
> > > coordinator/moderators (who
> > > > do not have other jobs at the same time, and are responsible for
> > > > interactions between the meeting’s physical
> > > participants/current speaker,
> > > > the Chair and the remote participants).
> > > >
> > > > · Establishing a clear procedure that would encourage remote
> > > participants
> > > > to intervene. Such a system is desirable both for those
> > > physically present
> > > > in Geneva and those observing the meeting remotely.
> > > >
> > > > · Providing as much interactivity as possible by giving remote
> > > > participants to interact and engage in meetings.
> > > >
> > > > · Providing multiple methods – video, voice and text
> > > channel, as well as
> > > > real-time transcription and video streaming – of coverage of
> > > the meeting
> > > >
> > > > · Enabling the meeting and remote participation through
> > > interactive
> > > > presentations access through RP.
> > > >
> > > > · Creating a select Task force or Working Group created that has
> > > > representatives from the Government, Private Sector and Civil
> > > Society that
> > > > is dedicated to seeing improvements of Remote
> > > Participation and to ensure
> > > > the incorporation of critical elements that have been
> > > highlighted to ensure
> > > > improved remote participation processes.
> > > >
> > > > Because only limited funds are available for face- to
> > > -face participation,
> > > > this issue is crucially important to all stakeholders from all
> > > > constituencies who are entitled to participate in the
> > > meetings, and who wish
> > > > to do so from a remote location. Meeting Chairs also play a
> > > central role in
> > > > creating a dynamic and inclusive environment that welcomes remote
> > > > participation.
> > > >
> > > > We also encourage greater partnership between the governments
> > > and private
> > > > sector in enhancing remote participation.
> > > >
> > > > We have to move beyond advocacy to listing and creating
> > > tangible outcomes to
> > > > make improved, stable and sustainable remote participation a
> > > reality.
> > > >
> > > > There are regions around the world where transportation is
> > > extremely
> > > > expensive and one such region is the Pacific which has 22
> > > countries and
> > > > territories. Remote participation was the only way that any of
> > > these
> > > > countries could access the IGF.
> > > >
> > > > However there is room to improve processes and create an IGF
> > > culture where
> > > > remote participation is prioritised through exploring tested
> > > methodology.
> > > >
> > > > The appropriate technical solutions need also to be explored
> > > as well
> > > > bandwidth and ensuring that there is uninterrupted power
> > > supply and
> > > > redundancy options where backup generators are critical to
> > > maintain a
> > > > consistent and seamless flow. The MAG and IGF Secretariats
> > > should also
> > > > ensure that there is sufficient and dedicated bandwidth
> > > capacity to sustain
> > > > the volume of traffic from remote participation.
> > > >
> > > > Aside from having the appropriate technical solutions and
> > > should also
> > > > include the following:-
> > > >
> > > > · Outreach.
> > > >
> > > > · Mapping local and regional stakeholders;
> > > >
> > > > · Coordinating with people on the ground significantly
> > > before the
> > > > IGF in a series of strategic roll out.
> > > >
> > > > · Creation of Guidelines for Meeting Chairs and
> > > Moderators whilst
> > > > noting the limitations.
> > > >
> > > > · Identifying how the private sector, civil society
> > > and governments
> > > > can be better involved in the remote hubs etc.
> > > >
> > > > · Encourage greater collaboration between the IGF RPWG
> > > and national,
> > > > sub regional and regional IGFs.
> > > >
> > > > We also express our support of the IGF RPWG which published
> > > guidelines and
> > > > recommendations for remote participation and IGF 2011 WS-67
> > > participants
> > > > prepared a draft of e-participation principles.
> > > >
> > > > Ends
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://wiki.igf-online.net/wiki/IGF_Virtual_Community
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Deirdre Williams
> > > > <williams.deirdre at gmail.com
> > > <mailto:williams.deirdre at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Dear Sala,
> > > >> I have been unavoidably out of contact all day, and am just
> > > catching up
> > > >> with reading the messages.
> > > >> I am not clear which document you want me to send.
> > > >> I have attached a word copy of my response yesterday,
> > > although from
> > > >> reading the discussion that has perhaps been superseded
> > > during the
> > > >> discussions today?
> > > >> Please let me know as I would be delighted to help.
> > > >> De
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On 22 February 2012 14:15, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
> > > >> <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com
> > > <mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Dear Deirdre,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> As you know our initial statement was used by the civil
> > > society component
> > > >>> of the CSTDWG as advised by Marilia.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> If you could please send it in a word document that would be
> > > super
> > > >>> helpful and easy to put up on the Statement Workspace. We
> > > will also be
> > > >>> sending our Statement to the IGF Secretariat.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Kind Regards,
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> > > >>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> > > >>> Cell: +679 998 2851 <tel:%2B679%20998%202851>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge"
> > > Sir William
> > > >> Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> > > >
> > > > Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> > > > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> > > > Cell: +679 998 2851 <tel:%2B679%20998%202851>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ____________________________________________________________
> > > > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > > > governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> > > <mailto: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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ____________________________________________________________
> > > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > > governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> > > <mailto: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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ____________________________________________________________
> > > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > > governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto: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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> > > FGV Direito Rio
> > >
> > > Center for Technology and Society
> > > Getulio Vargas Foundation
> > > Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
> >
> > --
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
> > executive director, association for progressive communications
> > www.apc.org
> > po box 29755, melville 2109
> > south africa
> > tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
-------------- 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