[governance] Remote Participation
Deirdre Williams
williams.deirdre at gmail.com
Fri Feb 24 19:19:40 EST 2012
Perhaps we need a statement that communicates 2 diffrent points of view?
Compromise is not always possible.
Deirdre
On 24 February 2012 19:51, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> 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
>
>
--
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120224/f6fcce82/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