[governance] Should the IGF be reformed?

Thu Mar 22 01:12:23 EDT 2018

Just to play devil's advocate bit.

As you may know, I am a champion of remote participation. However, the
reasons that ICANN actually gave up on remote hubs, and at ICANN61 readily
reduced RP to audio stream and email  at the drop of an Adobe Connect flaw,
should be contemplated.  If not handled well, remote participation can be
disruptive, and unsatisfactory to both local and remote participants. And
handling it well can be a big drain on resources. Some times simpler
solutions work, if not better, as well.

I have particular sympathy for those in Q&A queues who, having perhaps
traveled half way around the planet to attend, are pre-empted by somebody
at home, maybe still in their pajamas.

joly

On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 12:13 AM, Embley, Charity G <
Charity.G.Embley at ttu.edu> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> Just a point to add here:
>
>
> "*Remote participants aren't given the same recognition as on-site
> participants, added to the situation identified by Alex that only a few
> persons participate remotely. The low statistics of remote participation
> might be a result of the non-recognition.*.."
>
>
> I just want to add that remote participation has always BEEN an option but
> the problem for the lack of participation (that needs to be realized) has
> something to do with the time zone difference and personal obligations.
> This has to be accounted for. If an IGF meeting is somewhere in Europe or
> North America, people from the Asia Pacific region might have to spend
> their evenings trying to listen/participate to a session. People who are
> not attending the IGF on site can benefit attending remotely if an IGF is
> held on the same continent.  We had remote hubs and were coordinated by
> organizations such as ISOC chapters. But the time zone difference has been
> a huge factor. I know this for a fact because I participated in a remote
> hub. Plus, if I have a day job, I cannot be glued to a computer all day.
> Maybe if sessions with RP capabilities are held during weekends, some folks
> might stay up late or organized remote hub "parties" when it also does not
> interfere with anyone's day job.  A remote hub is not just
> merely connecting to the Internet - it also involves prior discussions with
> the local remote group so attendees can have a real understanding of
> the sessions they are attending. After the session, the local group should
> also have their own internal discussion based on the discussions/practices
> that transpired at the IGF meeting. RP attendees are also encouraged to ask
> questions and talk during real time. That's why there is a moderator for
> these things. I guess what I am trying to drive at is -there must be
> a framework to align RP with the IGF meetings.
>
>
> Maybe if someone (or a group) can take on a research undertaking to
> exactly find out why RP hubs are waning down, we may be able to discover
> the exact reasons.  We need evidence-based findings, not just mere
> assumptions.
>
>
> Thank you,
>
> Charity Gamboa Embley
>
>
> [image: 1505329837626_coe_header1.jpg]
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* governance-request at lists.riseup.net <governance-request at lists.
> riseup.net> on behalf of Chris Prince Udochukwu Njoku <
> udochukwu.njoku at unn.edu.ng>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 21, 2018 10:27:02 PM
> *To:* alex.comninos at gmail.com
> *Cc:* Arsène Tungali; governance at lists.riseup.net
> *Subject:* Re: [governance] Should the IGF be reformed?
>
> I like the submissions here so far. Although some of us have opposing
> views regarding reforming the forum, I noticed that no person had objected
> to Raul's assertion that the world was much better with the IGF than
> without it!  This means that none is saying "To hell with IGF."
>
> Also to me, the IGF is a good thing for many reasons, including Raul's,
> Anriette's and Raoul's. I understand Ayden wants IGF reformed but he
> doesn't believe reformation is possible. Before anyone can say whether
> Ayden is right or wrong, and to help us answer Arsene's questions, let's
> look at certain features of the IGF we have now.
>
> 1. There are too many movements and too much good sounding talk that
> translates to only a few actions. It's a discussion forum; yes, but what
> are or should be the aims of the discussions? It seems to me that many
> participants are focused on either having a large retinue of travels or
> enjoying travel funding.  Some others are satisfied with just organizing
> sessions to display oratorial skills or to show they can organize sessions
> in a high-level meeting.  What should be the outcomes of such sessions is
> not a consideration. This links naturally to No. 2.
>
> 2. There are too many sessions. Raul mentioned this. This obscures the
> priority attention and general participation some sessions deserve. It's
> worse when an essential subject/topic have duplicate to quintiplicate or
> more sessions. For example, over 5 Internet shutdowns sessions and about 6
> sessions on fake news were held in IGF 2017. In most cases, what actually
> separates one session's topic from another is the wording. As Raul
> suggested, sessions should be limited to a number that allows somewhat
> exhaustive discussions of subjects. In this way, participants can return
> home with convictions for concrete actions.
>
> 3. Remote participants aren't given the same recognition as on-site
> participants, added to the situation identified by Alex that only a few
> persons participate remotely. The low statistics of remote participation
> might be a result of the non-recognition. I had remote-participated in
> sessions where my chat questions and/or submissions weren't replied to.
> Yet, such international discussion meetings as IGF about Internet are an
> excellent opportunity to authoritatively showcase and guarantee the virtual
> property of the Internet which is central to its working and to any myriad
> of benefits it can give.
>
> 4. So many important stakeholders are left out: a) populations that speak
> only mother tongues; b) rural folks; c) low income people; d) the
> physically challenged (which are often a mix of the other groups); e)
> students; f) the uneducated / illiterate population; etc.  Most IGF
> participants who claim or think they represent any of these people are not
> true representatives. Mechanisms should be in place to make the forum more
> inclusive.
>
> 5. Government delegates / participants in many cases are people who have
> no authority to make recommendations or take decisions and don't even give
> reports when they return to their countries after meeting.
>
> 6. Stakeholders who should be central in certain sessions are often absent
> in the sessions. Is it proper that no African governments rep was present
> in a session on Internet shutdowns taking a toll on Africa's economy?
> That's just one example of sessions not having the appropriate participants
> for productive discussions. Do we leave things that way?
>
> 7. IGF, regional IGFs and national IGFs appear to be operating in
> isolation, independent of one another in practice. Themes of meetings are
> often unrelated, neglecting the truth that one forum ought to be feeder
> node to the next. This needs a remedy.
>
> I strongly think CS reps in MAG have a duty to present these and other
> shortcomings to MAG's discussions table. Depending on the strength of their
> business cases and way any recommendations in those lines will be made,
> since MAG doesn't take decisions for IGF, changes in favour are likely to
> take place.
>
> Contrary or more views needed.
>
> CPU
>
> On Wednesday, March 21, 2018, Alex Comninos <governance at lists.riseup.net>
> wrote:
> > Remote participation needs to become a real and appealing thing for the
> IGF to become relevant.
> > I have not taken part in IGFs since Bali due to geographical and
> financial constraints.
> > RP is always far in the background with almost no participants. It's
> also really hard to actually get that terrible Cisco software working on
> anything but a windows PC.
> > I did do some serious RP for the Mexico IGF. It could be a very powerful
> tool. One can easily monitor many sessions. Also one tends to be less
> distracted by schmoozing and travel fatigue.
> > The IGF has failed to communicate to the average netizen that it exists,
> what it is, and that we are all stakeholders.
> > On Mon, 19 Mar 2018, 20:40 Arsène Tungali, <governance at lists.riseup.net>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2018/03/lets-reform-
> igf-ensure-healthy-future/
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.internetsociety.org%2Fblog%2F2018%2F03%2Flets-reform-igf-ensure-healthy-future%2F&data=02%7C01%7Ccharity.g.embley%40ttu.edu%7C657ad03218ff48ff856808d58fa4d720%7C178a51bf8b2049ffb65556245d5c173c%7C0%7C0%7C636572860517929736&sdata=gnxqgCpvuC4G8suG1Ko3zz87bTt5ZLyPMhV4Q3hz7%2B8%3D&reserved=0>
> >>
> >> A blog from Raul (ISOC) about the need to reform the IGF. I know this
> is what so many other people believe we should do. Let’s talk about it!
> >>
> >> Can we discuss what are the changes that we would like to see happen to
> make the IGF as strong and powerful as it used to be? As of now, no one
> know where the IGF 2018 will take place and we are in March! All i know and
> heard from Chengetai is that they have 3 countries in mind but are yet to
> decide!
> >>
> >> Now that the new MAG was announced, what are our expectations of its
> members? What do you think of new and past members? What can we expect from
> our CS representatives there?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Arsene
> >>
> >> -----------------
> >> Arsène Tungali,
> >> about.me/ArseneTungali
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FArseneTungali&data=02%7C01%7Ccharity.g.embley%40ttu.edu%7C657ad03218ff48ff856808d58fa4d720%7C178a51bf8b2049ffb65556245d5c173c%7C0%7C0%7C636572860517929736&sdata=L0v11%2F0h%2BgXvaTFo7mQdEkfhjlwbMT9m9CPJU%2FN8RD4%3D&reserved=0>
> >> +243 993810967 <+243%20993%20810%20967>
> >> GPG: 523644A0
> >> Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo
> >> Sent from my iPhone (excuse typos)
> >> ---
> >> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
> >> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Friseup.net%2Flists&data=02%7C01%7Ccharity.g.embley%40ttu.edu%7C657ad03218ff48ff856808d58fa4d720%7C178a51bf8b2049ffb65556245d5c173c%7C0%7C0%7C636572860517929736&sdata=75s0n%2BGlSHP3M%2FCXIZt0zaFccn8XdvTwWf2UM63chvU%3D&reserved=0>
> >
> >>
> >
>
> --
> CPU
> _______________________________
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> *Chris Prince Udochukwu Njọkụ, Ph.D.*
>
> E-learning specialist; Information and knowledge management expert;
> Educator; ICT4D advocate; Researcher; Founder & President, Researchers on
> ICTs in Higher Education in Africa (RICTHE Africa); Founder, ICT4TeLe
> (ICT for Teaching and Learning - an e-learning initiative for educators and
> allied workers)
>
> Alternate e-mail: udochukwu.njoku at ieee.org, dr.
> c.p.udochukwunjoku at outlook.com
>
> Skype: pastoronmission;  Twitter: @DrCPUNjoku
>
> Tel.: +234 8077227038 <+234%20807%20722%207038>, 8063450674
> <(806)%20345-0674>, 8108218762 <(810)%20821-8762>
>
> Project 1:  https://sites.google.com/a/unn.edu.ng/eteachingproject/
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fa%2Funn.edu.ng%2Feteachingproject%2F&data=02%7C01%7Ccharity.g.embley%40ttu.edu%7C657ad03218ff48ff856808d58fa4d720%7C178a51bf8b2049ffb65556245d5c173c%7C0%7C0%7C636572860517929736&sdata=daM%2Bk81LiP8W1a2qtf1z8E2XM0H0J%2Fk080kdcPX%2F0M4%3D&reserved=0>
>
> Project’s Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/
> ETeachingProjectUniversityofNigeria
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FETeachingProjectUniversityofNigeria&data=02%7C01%7Ccharity.g.embley%40ttu.edu%7C657ad03218ff48ff856808d58fa4d720%7C178a51bf8b2049ffb65556245d5c173c%7C0%7C0%7C636572860517929736&sdata=xMR8S4R0Zcyv4OOQRocq053lAG%2FzcyObRc7NdCpwCNE%3D&reserved=0>
>
> Project 2:  https://sites.google.com/a/unn.edu.ng/nidnet
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fa%2Funn.edu.ng%2Fnidnet&data=02%7C01%7Ccharity.g.embley%40ttu.edu%7C657ad03218ff48ff856808d58fa4d720%7C178a51bf8b2049ffb65556245d5c173c%7C0%7C0%7C636572860517929736&sdata=yC5NcJb50Mc%2BjmjRMtk8MLOv6kDFhCKCkkLljcKkt4g%3D&reserved=0>
>
> Blog: http://www.chrisprinceudochukwunjoku.blogspot.com
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chrisprinceudochukwunjoku.blogspot.com&data=02%7C01%7Ccharity.g.embley%40ttu.edu%7C657ad03218ff48ff856808d58fa4d720%7C178a51bf8b2049ffb65556245d5c173c%7C0%7C0%7C636572860517929736&sdata=1DTwJKYUwiHlPDAywv5XCqSA5OMKV4UvNpbIF6NyXFs%3D&reserved=0>
>
> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prince.udochukwunjoku
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fprince.udochukwunjoku&data=02%7C01%7Ccharity.g.embley%40ttu.edu%7C657ad03218ff48ff856808d58fa4d720%7C178a51bf8b2049ffb65556245d5c173c%7C0%7C0%7C636572860517929736&sdata=LuJxYxJ8paaYuB4XBZoPudua9VNMYEqG%2FJYzaQrD6bo%3D&reserved=0>
>
> LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/chrisprinceudochukwunjoku
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fchrisprinceudochukwunjoku&data=02%7C01%7Ccharity.g.embley%40ttu.edu%7C657ad03218ff48ff856808d58fa4d720%7C178a51bf8b2049ffb65556245d5c173c%7C0%7C0%7C636572860517929736&sdata=dePiH2MAutlnDg%2Bvk0%2FUEaeIFqI1aSFQb7i8o4Iy8Is%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>  We mustn't remain with old ways of doing things, especially if they're
> not yielding desired results.
>
>
> ---
> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>
>

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20180322/be66987a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Outlook-1505329837.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 14104 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20180322/be66987a/attachment.jpg>