[governance] Re: [IRPCoalition] IGF - and the corporatisation scandal

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Sorry, but what has unraveled - except possibly an attempt to "ah..hah, gotcha!!" the MAG? :)

That said, speaking slots of any sort that take place in the actual conference halls are a risky proposition to promise in return for sponsorship.  There is an ever present risk that the IGF agenda gets piggybacked onto and becomes a soapbox for political, commercial or other interests.

Generally, it should be quite safe to host dignitaries from the sponsors to speak at lunch breaks, for example - or allow them to host separate sessions, clearly marked "sponsor: XXXX" where those that are interested can carry out discussions. [eg: A google public policy outreach session, just for example].  Very similar to advertiser sponsored features in newspapers - they're supposed to be clearly marked as such, but sometimes aren't.

--srs (iPad)

On 29-Jul-2013, at 9:15, Chaitanya Dhareshwar <chaitanyabd at gmail.com> wrote:

> Interesting to see how this is unraveling. I honestly thought I was the only one here who's clueless about this procedure and was feeling pretty foolish for not reading up/googling about it before.
>  
> Given the IGF has been happening a while now, would the MAG not try to familiarize themselves with the proposal documents in full? I'm asking out of want, to learn - not to apportion blame.
>  
> -C
> 

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