[governance] [bestbits] Fw: [Igfregionals] Fw: [IGFmaglist] World Economic Forum - Davos 2018 "Creating a Shared Future in a Fractured World”

parminder parminder at itforchange.net
Sat Jan 20 10:10:02 EST 2018

On Saturday 20 January 2018 04:56 PM, Chris Prince Udochukwu Njoku wrote:
> Can the invitation letter be seen by others? It's possible for the
> invitation to be just for Lynn (because she has adequate credentials
> to deserve personal invitation), but she sees an opportunity in it to
> make some presentations on behalf of IGF. That's what I suspect from
> the clause: 
>      "I/the IGF have been invited..."
> That's IMO also why it looks like MAG was bypassed.
> If the invitation is personal, Lynn has every right and all it takes
> to attend the forum and do all the roles she had outlined, but any
> ideas/opinions/arguments she will present and any incidents are
> strictly hers.

Yes Chris, it will be good to know, but do note that the email also talk
about some "two way collaboration between the WEF and IGF" .... this
doesn't look personal to me at all!  , parminder

> It doesn't (and can't) follow that because she's MAG chair she'll be
> representing MAG or IGF. If the invitation letter is specifically to
> IGF MAG Chair, then she's entltled to answer the invitation on that
> capacity, after properly informing the constituency. She may or may
> not seek anyone's inputs to what she'll say or do. However, an
> invitation letter to IGF certainly requires a process of determining
> the person or delegation to represent IGF in word and action. 
> I strongly think it's important for Lynn to explain her use of the
> forward slash between "I" and "the IGF".  Is the invitation letter
> ambiguous (not clear about who's invited)?
> CPU 
> On Jan 20, 2018 4:14 AM, "parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net
> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>> wrote:
>     On Friday 19 January 2018 11:23 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>     On 19/1/18 5:11 am, parminder wrote:
>>>     I really did not know that IGF had its own agency to represent
>>>     itself at other forums. Whom does it really represent? Because
>>>     when you represent, you also speak for. For whom does the it
>>>     speak, and on what basis? .. That is a mission creep which has
>>>     been done without consulting or even declaring....
>>     I actually agree with Parminder on this (yes, it does happen).
>>     Not that I think that the IGF shouldn't be able to be represented
>>     in an official way at other international institutions. On the
>>     contrary, I strongly believe that it should be able to do so, 
>     That might be one view, but it was not ever proposed nor agreed to
>     by, lets use the term, "IGF community". This is always the problem
>     with so called or claimed "open and flexible process", they get
>     captured by whoever can expend the most resources. Norms and
>     structures then can accordingly work to ensure fairness and
>     equity, the values that should be central to progressive civil society
>     .... parminder
>>     and the fact that it hasn't been able to effectively deliver
>>     messages to other institutions has been one of its chief
>>     failings. I also don't blame Lynn St Amour for wanting to do this.
>>     But this is not the way to do it! The liaison between IGF and WEF
>>     (and IETF, ICANN, OECD, WTO...) should be formally
>>     institutionalised in some way, so that there is accountability
>>     and legitimacy. It shouldn't just be casually announced that
>>     "I/the IGF have been invited...", as if the distinction is
>>     immaterial.
>>     I do disagree in one minor respect with Parminder and that's
>>     that, in my reading of what has happened, it's not that the MAG
>>     has engineered this, but rather that it's been done in a way that
>>     deliberately bypassed the MAG, because the MAG is so
>>     dysfunctional that it stands in the way of the evolution of the
>>     IGF, in this and other respects, and Lynn knows this.
>>     But that doesn't make it right. If anything, this means the MAG
>>     needs to be overhauled, not that it needs to be minimized and
>>     bypassed. I support Parminder's call for the CS members of the
>>     MAG to hold it accountable here and to call for the institution
>>     of a proper, transparent and accountable process for the
>>     appointment of formal institutional liaisons between the IGF and
>>     other bodies.
>>     -- 
>>     Jeremy Malcolm
>>     Senior Global Policy Analyst
>>     Electronic Frontier Foundation
>>     https://eff.org
>>     jmalcolm at eff.org <mailto:jmalcolm at eff.org>
>>     Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
>>     :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
>>     Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2016/11/27/key_jmalcolm.txt
>>     <https://www.eff.org/files/2016/11/27/key_jmalcolm.txt>
>>     PGP fingerprint: 75D2 4C0D 35EA EA2F 8CA8 8F79 4911 EC4A EDDF 1122
>     ---
>     To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net
>     <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>>
>     List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
> ---
> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20180120/aa9d5991/attachment.htm>

More information about the Governance mailing list