[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