[governance] Re: caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting

Tue Feb 12 10:26:34 EST 2013

+1 to this and to Jeremy's comment

--srs (iPad)

On 12-Feb-2013, at 19:31, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:

> Thanks Parminder.  Agreed. 
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
> On Tuesday, February 12, 2013, parminder wrote:
>> Norbert / All
>> 
>> Thanks for bringing these inputs and/or proposed changes to the statement to the elist. In fact I prefer that all substantial inputs/ proposed changes are made on this list, and not just on the web page... It helps engage others to comment, and may be, without suggesting that anyone is being irresponsible, increases the sense of responsibility  of whoever makes suggestions for changes. As argued earlier deliberative democracy is the key legitimacy of civil society, and I have found that inputting in the ensconced solitude of writing comments on editable web pages is often not the best way to promote deliberative democracy.
>> 
>> May I request that from now on whoever wants to make substantial amendments to the proposed statements also sends an email to this group about it - preferably with some amount of due reasoning.
>> 
>> parminder
>> 
>> 
>> On Tuesday 12 February 2013 03:20 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>> [IGC Coordinator hat on]
>> 
>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2013 I wrote:
>> Given that only a week is remaining until the submission deadline,
>> let's have an internal deadline of February 10 for suggesting points
>> to add or raising concerns about parts of the draft text.
>> A number of comments have been made that we now need to resolve. In the
>> following, I will give, for each of the paragraphs, the comment, and
>> then propose a resolution.
>> 
>> If from your perspective either the current text or the proposed
>> resolution is not acceptable, please say so by Wednesday Feb 13, 23.59
>> PST. If we get opposition to both variants, the coordinators may be
>> forced to make a rough consensus call or, in the worst case, drop the
>> conflicted paragraph from the statement in its entirety. Let's try to
>> avoid that eventuality.
>> 
>> All references are to http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/107
>> 
>> Paragraph 3
>> ===========
>> Current text: "There has been a sense of impatience and great urgency
>> vis a vis the fact that IGF has really not addressed key global public
>> policy questions that it was created to contribute towards resolution
>> of. For too long it has remained caught in matters of process and form.
>> It is time to do what it really needed to do."
>> 
>> McTim has commented: "This seems to be overly editorial to me. What
>> does it “really need to do”?"
>> 
>> Proposed resolution: Delete the two final sentences of the paragraph,
>> resulting in: "There has been a sense of impatience and great urgency
>> vis a vis the fact that IGF has really not addressed key global public
>> policy questions that it was created to contribute towards resolution
>> of."
>> 
>> Paragraph 12
>> ============
>> Current text: "A possible overall theme for 2013 could be: “Meaningful
>> participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance”."
>> 
>> Nick Ashton-Hart has commented: "That is a possible theme, but it is
>> also really dry – and  what connection does it have with the lives of
>> real Internet users? How about something like “How can Internet
>> Governance Benefit Users Worldwide?”"
>> 
>> Proposed resolution: Offer both proposals, resulting in: "A possible
>> overall theme for 2013 could be: “Meaningful participation of all
>> stakeholders in Internet governance”, or “How can Internet
>> Governance Benefit Users Worldwide?”."
>> 
>> Paragraphs 13 + 14
>> ==================
>> Current text of paragraph 13: "Main sessions and workshops should not
>> be competing with each other, as they are not substitutes.  Workshops
>> are the best forum for self-selected groups to exchange information,
>> opinions and experiences.  These can be more productive than main
>> sessions, but are often limited to narrow communities of interest and
>> can therefore lack external impact.  Main sessions are better for
>> bringing the insights developed through workshops and dynamic coalition
>> members to the broader community of IGF participants, including those
>> with influence over or connections to processes of policy development.
>> Main sessions have the potential to allow for high-level
>> consensus-building and strategising on how these insights can be
>> reflected in policy and/or technical processes elsewhere, sometimes
>> across issue areas: for example, messages on critical Internet
>> resources might also be relevant to those involved in security or
>> openness issues and vice versa. Therefore, main sessions should not be
>> treated as just “big workshops” relevant only to those with topical
>> interests, but should be for the broadest possible segment of the IGF
>> community to attend. Consequently, the programme should be restructured
>> so that main sessions and workshops are not happening at the same time.
>> Maybe the IGF could be extended to five says?"
>> 
>> Current text of paragraph 14: "Even then a reduction of the number of
>> main sessions and a reduction of the number of workshops is necessary.
>> The specific choice of main session topics should vary year by year to
>> address truly “hot topics” that are on the tips of tongues everywhere."
>> 
>> Nick Ashton-Hart has attached the following comment to paragraph 13:
>> "There should not be ‘reruns’ of sessions held at previous IGFs and new
>> voices should be prioritised over those who have been heard from many
>> times."
>> 
>> Proposed resolution: Add Nick's text to the end or paragraph 14,
>> resulting in the following new text for paragraph 14: "Even then a
>> reduction of the number of main
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130212/f1cb35d5/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