[governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG

[Fouad Bajwa]

Milton the challenge lies in the attributes of the Main Session and
thats where the issue of timing and relevance comes in.

The MAG does not like to do extra ordinary work and that is including
the broader stakeholdership from the open consultations to help design
meaningful main sessions.

You may have a slight idea what a MAG member volunteering to
coordinate a main session goes through. First they receive little or
no support from the MAG to include members from outside the MAG. So
somehow the MAG considers itself the ultimate expert of all issues.
This is an insane understanding that clearly reflects in the Main
Sessions and their contents.

The meaningfulness or issues of depth you raise are bogged down by the
politics within the MAG and its stakeholders. You mention CIR, one of
the most opposed issues of the past and todays pleasant baby appears
to be in the list of good shows but still has no start or end to it
and what it intends to achieve is as unclear as all other main
sessions except for taking stock and regional IGF feedbacks.

It is only when you challenge the time issue that the MAG will
reconsider what are the problems surrounding the relevance and
meaningful depth of the Main Session topics. I was myself disappointed
when the IG4D main session was reduced to 1.5 hours but then was
somewhat unsatisfactorily satisfied to see development mainstreaming
attempts the IGF in Kenya in connection to IG4D.

If I were to deal with the IGF, the first Main Session would be
setting the scene and leave that half day and the rest of the next two
days to contribute to the last day Main Sessions through workshops. I
would end workshops on the last day so that everyone could attend
short, focused and meaningful main sessions all day.

Best

Fouad

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
> was on the panel for the main session on CIR. I think it was as well-organized and substantive as it could possibly be, given that there were 9 panelists dealing with 3 very distinct issues (new TLDs, IP address markets, and WCIT). However, as good as that session was substantively, it was in effect little more than an extended, very large panel session from a conference. In other words, it discussed the issues, sometimes in interesting ways; in some ways, the discussion was more general and less

-------------- 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