[governance] Moving Foreward into the 2015 Agenda

[William Drake]

Hi

> On Nov 22, 2014, at 8:08 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 1. IGF MAG Meeting in early December in Geneva and preparations for the 10th IGF in Brazil (November 2015);
> 
> [Sala T: I suggest we initiate pointers for our MAG members to raise asap and make a call for comments on the etherpad or mailing list and initiate a thread or continue input into Bill Drake and other's call for input. As a community, we should make a more consolidated stand and submit a proper statement or 3 page submissions on key topics. This can include and involve wider community input and be submitted by our MAG representatives. Priority should be given to this given the short time we have.

Share the sentiment but it’s a bit late, the secretariat’s synthesis paper already has been published. http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/documents/contributions/open-consultations/2014-december/408-synthesis-paper-contributions-taking-stock-of-igf-2014-and-looking-forward-to-igf-2015/file <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/documents/contributions/open-consultations/2014-december/408-synthesis-paper-contributions-taking-stock-of-igf-2014-and-looking-forward-to-igf-2015/file>  

Since the IGC no longer has anything to say about the IGF (why bother when ideological pissing matches are just so much more constructive), the only CS input documents it could draw on regarding the broad architecture were those from Jeremy, APC, and CDT. These made many good points, but in the synthesis the notion of implementing the NM statement's recommendations, consistent with what the IGC used to advocate, does not exactly stand out as a focal point for discussion.  There is one paragraph that could be referred to and built on in interventions though, should the people participating in next week’s open consultation and MAG meeting wish to coordinate on messaging:

"34. It was suggested that, while still maintaining the key characteristic of being an open platform for discussion, the IGF should continue to develop more tangible outcomes, as recommended by the Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) Working Group on Improvements to the IGF. Some contributions emphasized that the tenth IGF could take a step forward in this direction if it were to practically use designated main sessions, workshops, other sessions or working groups to develop non-binding opinions, recommendations and/or policy principles that stakeholders could use to address currently pressing Internet-related issues. One input suggested that a separate “Multistakeholder Internet Policy Council” could be formed to assess whether a text proposal/policy recommendation(s) discussed within the framework of IGF preparatory work or in the annual meeting itself had reached consensus.”

Best

Bill


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20141124/0032d44e/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