From governance at lists.riseup.net Mon Apr 1 08:25:50 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Deirdre Williams (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 08:25:50 -0400 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: Dear Sivasubramanian, (Apologies for cross-posting) Although various people have pointed to the need for a common voice for civil society in this arena it really seems that there is no longer an appetite for the individual effort needed for a successful collaboration of this type. I would be very happy to have this opinion drowned by a chorus of voices proving me wrong, but I am not expecting to hear them. So I wonder if we should be looking for a new means to and a new process for collaboration? Should this be included in the agenda under 2 - Concrete ways forward? I don't have any real suggestions. I think that, more now than before, the process depends on individuals being willing to make a commitment of time energy and effort, and that this is happening in a context where the general ethos has lost its encouragement of sharing and communal energy. It needs to become possible again to perceive a common good. Should this happen by painstakingly linking very small local initiatives, where the "common good" is easy to see, rather than attempting things on a global scale (which in fact is "top down")? Hopefully the discussion on 9th will take us nearer to a solution. Best wishes Deirdre On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 at 16:41, Sivasubramanian M <6.Internet at gmail.com> wrote: > With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only about 8 > respondents. > > Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll > announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. > (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than > say "future of IG Civil Society". > > Sivasubramanian M > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar > wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >> on the issues we work on. >> >> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >> forward. >> >> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be great >> if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and set up a >> room. >> >> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >> >> *Suggested agenda* >> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >> >> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >> >> Best >> Sheetal. >> >> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >> wrote: >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have attached >>> the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included at the >>> top in case useful. >>> >>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half spent >>> discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 hour) and >>> the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other key >>> members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>> >>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way to >>> promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change the >>> current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way forward >>> which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible range of >>> opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, please do >>> chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up call. >>> >>> Thanks again. >>> >>> Best >>> Sheetal. >>> >>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great to >>>> hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill out >>>> the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>> >>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>> >>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>> >>>> index&sid=528319 >>>> >>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next >>>> steps next week. >>>> >>>> Thank you! >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Sheetal. >>>> >>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to those who >>>>> have responded already. >>>>> >>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, by >>>>> using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set of >>>>> discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>> >>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>> >>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>> >>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> Sheetal. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a survey >>>>>> below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a call on >>>>>> February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it was >>>>>> agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>> >>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>> calls. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>> >>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to complete >>>>>> the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please complete >>>>>> the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any questions at all, >>>>>> don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>> >>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> >>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For those >>>>>>> who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants and >>>>>>> notes here: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and IGC >>>>>>> have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, particularly >>>>>>> when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a survey to both >>>>>>> lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward which were >>>>>>> discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with the broader >>>>>>> communities feed into a decision on the future of the platforms. The survey >>>>>>> will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, and your participation >>>>>>> would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is this >>>>>>>> coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full details >>>>>>>> are included in my previous email and I've updated the etherpad >>>>>>>> with those >>>>>>>> planning to attend. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time for >>>>>>>>> the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full details of the >>>>>>>>> call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward to >>>>>>>>> speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will appear on >>>>>>>>> the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the link with >>>>>>>>> the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if you do not >>>>>>>>> want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you call in. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in each >>>>>>>>> network >>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing devices: >>>>>>>>> pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>> and I've >>>>>>>>> also added the names of those who indicated they were available for the >>>>>>>>> call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the call >>>>>>>>> without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea of >>>>>>>>> numbers. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and thanks >>>>>>>>>> to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant documents too. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base again in >>>>>>>>>> the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here provide >>>>>>>>>> rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to set up a >>>>>>>>>> conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to decide >>>>>>>>>> next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we suggest >>>>>>>>>> only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to some IGC >>>>>>>>>> folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion only. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next week >>>>>>>>>> (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link too. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a couple >>>>>>>>>>> of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy are >>>>>>>>>>> saying. >>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing information/discussing >>>>>>>>>>> things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits separately, would merging >>>>>>>>>>> the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, what >>>>>>>>>>> we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started IGC >>>>>>>>>>> and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that we >>>>>>>>>>> would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many of us >>>>>>>>>>> also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with identifying >>>>>>>>>>> volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and find a >>>>>>>>>>> common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need to >>>>>>>>>>> devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee of >>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was constituted >>>>>>>>>>>> and why? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had been >>>>>>>>>>>> able to >>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU WCIT >>>>>>>>>>>> was >>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action was >>>>>>>>>>>> important, >>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and outside >>>>>>>>>>>> of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven the >>>>>>>>>>>> IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having hidden >>>>>>>>>>>> agendas >>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So >>>>>>>>>>>> whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and informal, >>>>>>>>>>>> pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in us >>>>>>>>>>>> investing >>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and >>>>>>>>>>>> processes. >>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could resuscitate >>>>>>>>>>>> Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I don't >>>>>>>>>>>> think >>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd >>>>>>>>>>>> like to >>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - -O - >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" >>>>>>>>>>> Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> >> *Sheetal Kumar* >> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > -- > Sivasubramanian M > Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Wed Apr 3 14:01:13 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (sivasubramanian muthusamy (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 23:31:13 +0530 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: Posting it again because the message wasn't delivered to igcaucus.org maibox due to some error. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: sivasubramanian muthusamy <6.internet at gmail.com> Date: Tue, Apr 2, 2019, 6:10 PM Subject: Re: [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps To: Deirdre Williams Cc: Sheetal Kumar , < bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>, , CWCS (IGC) < governance at lists.riseup.net> I suggest we reach out to some of the WSIS time CS leaders who built the IGC to step in and direct the course of action. Also, is there a way to draw up a spread sheet to find how many are not subscribed to both the lists? On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, 5:59 PM Deirdre Williams wrote: > I agree with Siva and Remmy BUT who is going to bell the cat? (who will do > the things suggested) > Deirdre > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 03:13, sivasubramanian muthusamy < > 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Is there a comparitive list of best bit subscribers and IGC members? Who >> is in bestbits while not being part of IGC? >> >> Also, what are there other related CS lists discussing IG issues, if not >> comprehensively, issues such as Privacy, Security, Community Access? Why >> not invite them to be a part of a larger IG Caucus, irrespective of whether >> they physically and regularly participate in the global IGF? >> >> Is there a way of reaching out to NRIs to ask for the list of CS >> participants in NRIs? >> >> Not merely consolidate, but also expand. A wider CS could bring in >> creative solutions to the IG process and cause a balance. >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> >> On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, 5:56 PM Deirdre Williams >> wrote: >> >>> Dear Sivasubramanian, >>> (Apologies for cross-posting) >>> Although various people have pointed to the need for a common voice for >>> civil society in this arena it really seems that there is no longer an >>> appetite for the individual effort needed for a successful collaboration of >>> this type. I would be very happy to have this opinion drowned by a chorus >>> of voices proving me wrong, but I am not expecting to hear them. >>> So I wonder if we should be looking for a new means to and a new process >>> for collaboration? >>> Should this be included in the agenda under 2 - Concrete ways forward? >>> I don't have any real suggestions. I think that, more now than before, >>> the process depends on individuals being willing to make a commitment of >>> time energy and effort, and that this is happening in a context where the >>> general ethos has lost its encouragement of sharing and communal energy. >>> It needs to become possible again to perceive a common good. Should this >>> happen by painstakingly linking very small local initiatives, where the >>> "common good" is easy to see, rather than attempting things on a global >>> scale (which in fact is "top down")? >>> Hopefully the discussion on 9th will take us nearer to a solution. >>> Best wishes >>> Deirdre >>> >>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 at 16:41, Sivasubramanian M <6.Internet at gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only about >>>> 8 respondents. >>>> >>>> Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll >>>> announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. >>>> (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than >>>> say "future of IG Civil Society". >>>> >>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >>>>> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >>>>> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >>>>> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >>>>> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >>>>> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >>>>> on the issues we work on. >>>>> >>>>> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >>>>> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >>>>> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >>>>> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >>>>> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >>>>> forward. >>>>> >>>>> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be >>>>> great if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and >>>>> set up a room. >>>>> >>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >>>>> >>>>> *Suggested agenda* >>>>> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >>>>> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >>>>> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >>>>> >>>>> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> Sheetal. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have >>>>>> attached the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included >>>>>> at the top in case useful. >>>>>> >>>>>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half >>>>>> spent discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 >>>>>> hour) and the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other >>>>>> key members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>>>>> >>>>>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way to >>>>>> promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change the >>>>>> current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way forward >>>>>> which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible range of >>>>>> opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, please do >>>>>> chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up call. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks again. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great to >>>>>>> hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill out >>>>>>> the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next >>>>>>> steps next week. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to those >>>>>>>> who have responded already. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, >>>>>>>> by using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set >>>>>>>> of discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a >>>>>>>>> survey below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a >>>>>>>>> call on February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it >>>>>>>>> was agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>>>>> calls. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to >>>>>>>>> complete the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please >>>>>>>>> complete the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any questions >>>>>>>>> at all, don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For >>>>>>>>>> those who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants >>>>>>>>>> and notes here: >>>>>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and >>>>>>>>>> IGC have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, >>>>>>>>>> particularly when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a >>>>>>>>>> survey to both lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward >>>>>>>>>> which were discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with >>>>>>>>>> the broader communities feed into a decision on the future of the >>>>>>>>>> platforms. The survey will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, >>>>>>>>>> and your participation would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is >>>>>>>>>>> this coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full >>>>>>>>>>> details are included in my previous email and I've updated the >>>>>>>>>>> etherpad >>>>>>>>>>> with those planning to attend. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time >>>>>>>>>>>> for the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full details >>>>>>>>>>>> of the call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward to >>>>>>>>>>>> speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will appear >>>>>>>>>>>> on the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the link with >>>>>>>>>>>> the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if you do not >>>>>>>>>>>> want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you call in. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing devices: >>>>>>>>>>>> pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>>>>> and I've >>>>>>>>>>>> also added the names of those who indicated they were available for the >>>>>>>>>>>> call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the call >>>>>>>>>>>> without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea of >>>>>>>>>>>> numbers. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and >>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant >>>>>>>>>>>>> documents too. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base again >>>>>>>>>>>>> in the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here >>>>>>>>>>>>> provide rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to >>>>>>>>>>>>> set up a conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to decide >>>>>>>>>>>>> next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we suggest >>>>>>>>>>>>> only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to some IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>> folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion only. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next week >>>>>>>>>>>>> (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link too. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> couple of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>>> information/discussing things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>> separately, would merging the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started >>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>> would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> us also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> identifying volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constituted and why? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been able to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WCIT was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> important, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outside of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hidden agendas >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and informal, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us investing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> processes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could resuscitate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -O - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir >>> William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>> >> > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Thu Apr 4 10:33:28 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Akinremi Peter Taiwo (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2019 15:33:28 +0100 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: Hi Sivasubramanian, I think what was agreed was that the survey should be limited to Bestbit only and that the discussion about merging should be limited to each group. This would enable each group to do a kind of an independent assessment that would inform the decision of whether the group should cease or merge. Also, I could remember that some folks on the IGC group wants IGC to remain as it is. @Deirdre Williams I remembered I openly shared some contacts on the IGC list back then, which might be the privacy issue you are referring to. Aside of that, I don't think I was in the picture of any privacy issue that affected the group. Maybe Jeremy could throw more light on this. I could also remembered during the review of CSCG, part of our discussion was to accommodate regional civil society organization in the sphere of IG but the challenge of the individual wearing many hat remains. Regards. Peter On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 9:41 PM Sivasubramanian M < governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote: > With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only about 8 > respondents. > > Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll > announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. > (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than > say "future of IG Civil Society". > > Sivasubramanian M > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar > wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >> on the issues we work on. >> >> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >> forward. >> >> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be great >> if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and set up a >> room. >> >> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >> >> *Suggested agenda* >> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >> >> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >> >> Best >> Sheetal. >> >> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >> wrote: >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have attached >>> the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included at the >>> top in case useful. >>> >>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half spent >>> discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 hour) and >>> the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other key >>> members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>> >>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way to >>> promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change the >>> current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way forward >>> which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible range of >>> opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, please do >>> chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up call. >>> >>> Thanks again. >>> >>> Best >>> Sheetal. >>> >>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great to >>>> hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill out >>>> the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>> >>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>> >>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>> >>>> index&sid=528319 >>>> >>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next >>>> steps next week. >>>> >>>> Thank you! >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Sheetal. >>>> >>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to those who >>>>> have responded already. >>>>> >>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, by >>>>> using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set of >>>>> discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>> >>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>> >>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>> >>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> Sheetal. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a survey >>>>>> below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a call on >>>>>> February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it was >>>>>> agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>> >>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>> calls. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>> >>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to complete >>>>>> the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please complete >>>>>> the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any questions at all, >>>>>> don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>> >>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> >>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For those >>>>>>> who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants and >>>>>>> notes here: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and IGC >>>>>>> have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, particularly >>>>>>> when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a survey to both >>>>>>> lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward which were >>>>>>> discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with the broader >>>>>>> communities feed into a decision on the future of the platforms. The survey >>>>>>> will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, and your participation >>>>>>> would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is this >>>>>>>> coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full details >>>>>>>> are included in my previous email and I've updated the etherpad >>>>>>>> with those >>>>>>>> planning to attend. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time for >>>>>>>>> the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full details of the >>>>>>>>> call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward to >>>>>>>>> speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will appear on >>>>>>>>> the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the link with >>>>>>>>> the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if you do not >>>>>>>>> want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you call in. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in each >>>>>>>>> network >>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing devices: >>>>>>>>> pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>> and I've >>>>>>>>> also added the names of those who indicated they were available for the >>>>>>>>> call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the call >>>>>>>>> without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea of >>>>>>>>> numbers. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and thanks >>>>>>>>>> to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant documents too. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base again in >>>>>>>>>> the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here provide >>>>>>>>>> rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to set up a >>>>>>>>>> conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to decide >>>>>>>>>> next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we suggest >>>>>>>>>> only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to some IGC >>>>>>>>>> folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion only. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next week >>>>>>>>>> (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link too. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a couple >>>>>>>>>>> of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy are >>>>>>>>>>> saying. >>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing information/discussing >>>>>>>>>>> things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits separately, would merging >>>>>>>>>>> the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, what >>>>>>>>>>> we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started IGC >>>>>>>>>>> and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that we >>>>>>>>>>> would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many of us >>>>>>>>>>> also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with identifying >>>>>>>>>>> volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and find a >>>>>>>>>>> common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need to >>>>>>>>>>> devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee of >>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was constituted >>>>>>>>>>>> and why? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had been >>>>>>>>>>>> able to >>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU WCIT >>>>>>>>>>>> was >>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action was >>>>>>>>>>>> important, >>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and outside >>>>>>>>>>>> of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven the >>>>>>>>>>>> IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having hidden >>>>>>>>>>>> agendas >>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So >>>>>>>>>>>> whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and informal, >>>>>>>>>>>> pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in us >>>>>>>>>>>> investing >>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and >>>>>>>>>>>> processes. >>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could resuscitate >>>>>>>>>>>> Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I don't >>>>>>>>>>>> think >>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd >>>>>>>>>>>> like to >>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - -O - >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" >>>>>>>>>>> Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> >> *Sheetal Kumar* >> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > -- > Sivasubramanian M > Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com > > --- > To unsubscribe: > List help: > -- Peter Taiwo Akinremi about.me/petertaiwoakinremi -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Thu Apr 4 23:11:48 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (sivasubramanian muthusamy (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 08:41:48 +0530 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: I wasn't aware that it was formally decided by the Bestbits list to discuss this list-wise. Posting a note here on a different problem. The igcaucus. org mailbox is NOT receiving messages, who is managing the Governance lists please? Sivasubramanian M twitter.com/shivaindia On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 8:03 PM Akinremi Peter Taiwo wrote: > Hi Sivasubramanian, > > I think what was agreed was that the survey should be limited to Bestbit > only and that the discussion about merging should be limited to each group. > This would enable each group to do a kind of an independent assessment that > would inform the decision of whether the group should cease or merge. Also, > I could remember that some folks on the IGC group wants IGC to remain as it > is. > > @Deirdre Williams I remembered I openly shared some contacts on the IGC > list back then, which might be the privacy issue you are referring to. > Aside of that, I don't think I was in the picture of any privacy issue that > affected the group. Maybe Jeremy could throw more light on this. > > I could also remembered during the review of CSCG, part of our discussion > was to accommodate regional civil society organization in the sphere of IG > but the challenge of the individual wearing many hat remains. > > Regards. > Peter > > On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 9:41 PM Sivasubramanian M < > governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote: > >> With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only about 8 >> respondents. >> >> Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll >> announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. >> (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than >> say "future of IG Civil Society". >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> >> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar >> wrote: >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >>> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >>> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >>> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >>> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >>> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >>> on the issues we work on. >>> >>> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >>> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >>> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >>> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >>> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >>> forward. >>> >>> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be great >>> if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and set up a >>> room. >>> >>> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >>> >>> *Suggested agenda* >>> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >>> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >>> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >>> >>> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >>> >>> Best >>> Sheetal. >>> >>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have attached >>>> the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included at the >>>> top in case useful. >>>> >>>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half spent >>>> discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 hour) and >>>> the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other key >>>> members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>>> >>>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way to >>>> promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change the >>>> current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way forward >>>> which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible range of >>>> opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, please do >>>> chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up call. >>>> >>>> Thanks again. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Sheetal. >>>> >>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great to >>>>> hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill out >>>>> the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>> >>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>> >>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>> >>>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next >>>>> steps next week. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you! >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> Sheetal. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to those >>>>>> who have responded already. >>>>>> >>>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, by >>>>>> using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set of >>>>>> discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>> >>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>> >>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a survey >>>>>>> below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a call on >>>>>>> February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it was >>>>>>> agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>>> calls. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to >>>>>>> complete the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please >>>>>>> complete the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any questions at >>>>>>> all, don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For >>>>>>>> those who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants >>>>>>>> and notes here: >>>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and IGC >>>>>>>> have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, particularly >>>>>>>> when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a survey to both >>>>>>>> lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward which were >>>>>>>> discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with the broader >>>>>>>> communities feed into a decision on the future of the platforms. The survey >>>>>>>> will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, and your participation >>>>>>>> would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is this >>>>>>>>> coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full details >>>>>>>>> are included in my previous email and I've updated the etherpad >>>>>>>>> with those >>>>>>>>> planning to attend. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time for >>>>>>>>>> the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full details of the >>>>>>>>>> call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward to >>>>>>>>>> speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will appear on >>>>>>>>>> the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the link with >>>>>>>>>> the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if you do not >>>>>>>>>> want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you call in. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing devices: >>>>>>>>>> pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>>> and I've >>>>>>>>>> also added the names of those who indicated they were available for the >>>>>>>>>> call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the call >>>>>>>>>> without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea of >>>>>>>>>> numbers. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and thanks >>>>>>>>>>> to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant documents too. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base again >>>>>>>>>>> in the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here >>>>>>>>>>> provide rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to >>>>>>>>>>> set up a conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to decide >>>>>>>>>>> next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we suggest >>>>>>>>>>> only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to some IGC >>>>>>>>>>> folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion only. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next week >>>>>>>>>>> (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link too. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a >>>>>>>>>>>> couple of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy >>>>>>>>>>>> are saying. >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing >>>>>>>>>>>> information/discussing things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>> separately, would merging the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, what >>>>>>>>>>>> we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started IGC >>>>>>>>>>>> and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that we >>>>>>>>>>>> would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many of >>>>>>>>>>>> us also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with >>>>>>>>>>>> identifying volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and find a >>>>>>>>>>>> common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need to >>>>>>>>>>>> devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee of >>>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was >>>>>>>>>>>>> constituted and why? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had >>>>>>>>>>>>> been able to >>>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU >>>>>>>>>>>>> WCIT was >>>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action was >>>>>>>>>>>>> important, >>>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and outside >>>>>>>>>>>>> of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven the >>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having hidden >>>>>>>>>>>>> agendas >>>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So >>>>>>>>>>>>> whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and informal, >>>>>>>>>>>>> pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in us >>>>>>>>>>>>> investing >>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and >>>>>>>>>>>>> processes. >>>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could resuscitate >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I >>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think >>>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>> like to >>>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - -O >>>>>>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" >>>>>>>>>>>> Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> >> -- >> Sivasubramanian M >> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com >> >> --- >> To unsubscribe: >> List help: >> > > > -- > > > Peter Taiwo Akinremi > about.me/petertaiwoakinremi > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Fri Apr 5 01:42:36 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Amrita" (via governance Mailing List) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 11:12:36 +0530 Subject: [governance] CCAOI: Policy and IG Updates of March 2019 from the Indian Perspective In-Reply-To: <005d01d4d7c4$03c8f350$0b5ad9f0$@com> References: <001e01d4bdd4$087e7a50$197b6ef0$@com> <005d01d4d7c4$03c8f350$0b5ad9f0$@com> Message-ID: <010e01d4eb72$623d4a50$26b7def0$@com> Hi, Apologies for cross posting. For those who may be interested, read the CCAOI March Newsletter, for curated news on IG events and policy discussions, from the Indian perspective using this link. Regards Amrita CCAOI -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Fri Apr 5 02:09:16 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Amrita" (via governance Mailing List) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 11:39:16 +0530 Subject: [governance] CCAOI: Policy and IG Updates of March 2019 from the Indian Perspective References: <001e01d4bdd4$087e7a50$197b6ef0$@com> <005d01d4d7c4$03c8f350$0b5ad9f0$@com> Message-ID: <016d01d4eb76$1e732d40$5b5987c0$@com> Apologies this is the link: http://www.ccaoi.in/UI/links/fwnewsletter/CCAOI%20Newsletter%20March%202019. pdf From: Amrita [mailto:amritachoudhury8 at gmail.com] Sent: Friday, April 5, 2019 11:13 AM To: 'CCAOI' Subject: CCAOI: Policy and IG Updates of March 2019 from the Indian Perspective Hi, Apologies for cross posting. For those who may be interested, read the CCAOI March Newsletter, for curated news on IG events and policy discussions, from the Indian perspective using this link. Regards Amrita CCAOI -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joly at punkcast.com Fri Apr 5 03:01:46 2019 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 03:01:46 -0400 Subject: [governance] WEBCAST TODAY: Machines, Minds, and Morality: Ethics in a Changing Technological World Message-ID: Since Dave Farber has traveled all the way from Tokyo to Pennsylvania to deliver this talk on the perils of AI, the least we can do is tune in and pay attention! [image: livestream] Today *Friday, April 5, 2019* st *9am ET* (13:00 UTC) the *Institute for Ethical Leadership and Social Responsibility *at Rosemont College hosts its 2019 Symposium - *Machines, Minds, and Morality: Ethics in a Changing Technological World *. A keynote '*The Benefits, Dangers and Dilemmas of Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence*', will be delivered by *David J. Farber*, co-Director of the *Cyber Civilization Research Center * at Keio University (Tokyo), followed by a presentation by *Dr. Michael Kearns*, Chair of Computer and Information Science at the University of Pennsylvania. A culminating roundtable discussion will include *Dr. Sorelle Friedler* (Haverford College) and *Bilita Mattes* (Provost and CAO, Harrisburg University). The event will be webcast live on the *Internet Society Livestream Channel *. *VIEW ON LIVESTREAM: https://livestream.com/internetsociety/rosemontethics/ * *AGENDA: https://www.rosemont.edu/about/the-institute/symposium.php * *TWITTER: #rosemontethics https://bit.ly/Rosemontethics * *Permalink* https://isoc.live/11018/ - -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast -------------------------------------------------------------- - -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Fri Apr 5 03:35:04 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Akinremi Peter Taiwo (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 08:35:04 +0100 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: Hi Sivasubramanian, I don't understand what you mean by saying igcaucus.org mailbox is not receiving messages. IGC is currently hosted on riseup.net mailing-list. Please can you help me understand what you are trying to do so as to be able to help. Regards. Peter On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 4:12 AM sivasubramanian muthusamy < 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > > I wasn't aware that it was formally decided by the Bestbits list to > discuss this list-wise. Posting a note here on a different problem. The > igcaucus. org mailbox is NOT receiving messages, who is managing the > Governance lists please? > > Sivasubramanian M > twitter.com/shivaindia > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 8:03 PM Akinremi Peter Taiwo > wrote: > >> Hi Sivasubramanian, >> >> I think what was agreed was that the survey should be limited to Bestbit >> only and that the discussion about merging should be limited to each group. >> This would enable each group to do a kind of an independent assessment that >> would inform the decision of whether the group should cease or merge. Also, >> I could remember that some folks on the IGC group wants IGC to remain as it >> is. >> >> @Deirdre Williams I remembered I openly shared some contacts on the IGC >> list back then, which might be the privacy issue you are referring to. >> Aside of that, I don't think I was in the picture of any privacy issue that >> affected the group. Maybe Jeremy could throw more light on this. >> >> I could also remembered during the review of CSCG, part of our discussion >> was to accommodate regional civil society organization in the sphere of IG >> but the challenge of the individual wearing many hat remains. >> >> Regards. >> Peter >> >> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 9:41 PM Sivasubramanian M < >> governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote: >> >>> With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only about 8 >>> respondents. >>> >>> Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll >>> announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. >>> (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than >>> say "future of IG Civil Society". >>> >>> Sivasubramanian M >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >>>> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >>>> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >>>> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >>>> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >>>> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >>>> on the issues we work on. >>>> >>>> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >>>> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >>>> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >>>> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >>>> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >>>> forward. >>>> >>>> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be >>>> great if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and >>>> set up a room. >>>> >>>> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >>>> >>>> *Suggested agenda* >>>> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >>>> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >>>> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >>>> >>>> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Sheetal. >>>> >>>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have attached >>>>> the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included at the >>>>> top in case useful. >>>>> >>>>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half spent >>>>> discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 hour) and >>>>> the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other key >>>>> members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>>>> >>>>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way to >>>>> promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change the >>>>> current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way forward >>>>> which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible range of >>>>> opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, please do >>>>> chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up call. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks again. >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> Sheetal. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great to >>>>>> hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill out >>>>>> the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>> >>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>> >>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next >>>>>> steps next week. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to those >>>>>>> who have responded already. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, by >>>>>>> using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set of >>>>>>> discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a survey >>>>>>>> below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a call on >>>>>>>> February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it was >>>>>>>> agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>>>> calls. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to >>>>>>>> complete the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please >>>>>>>> complete the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any questions >>>>>>>> at all, don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For >>>>>>>>> those who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants >>>>>>>>> and notes here: >>>>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and IGC >>>>>>>>> have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, particularly >>>>>>>>> when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a survey to both >>>>>>>>> lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward which were >>>>>>>>> discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with the broader >>>>>>>>> communities feed into a decision on the future of the platforms. The survey >>>>>>>>> will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, and your participation >>>>>>>>> would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is >>>>>>>>>> this coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full >>>>>>>>>> details are included in my previous email and I've updated the >>>>>>>>>> etherpad >>>>>>>>>> with those planning to attend. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time for >>>>>>>>>>> the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full details of >>>>>>>>>>> the call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward to >>>>>>>>>>> speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will appear >>>>>>>>>>> on the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the link with >>>>>>>>>>> the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if you do not >>>>>>>>>>> want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you call in. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing devices: >>>>>>>>>>> pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>>>> and I've >>>>>>>>>>> also added the names of those who indicated they were available for the >>>>>>>>>>> call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the call >>>>>>>>>>> without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea of >>>>>>>>>>> numbers. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and thanks >>>>>>>>>>>> to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant documents too. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base again >>>>>>>>>>>> in the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here >>>>>>>>>>>> provide rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to >>>>>>>>>>>> set up a conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to decide >>>>>>>>>>>> next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we suggest >>>>>>>>>>>> only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to some IGC >>>>>>>>>>>> folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion only. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next week >>>>>>>>>>>> (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link too. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a >>>>>>>>>>>>> couple of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy >>>>>>>>>>>>> are saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>> information/discussing things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>> separately, would merging the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, >>>>>>>>>>>>> what we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>> and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that we >>>>>>>>>>>>> would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many of >>>>>>>>>>>>> us also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with >>>>>>>>>>>>> identifying volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and find a >>>>>>>>>>>>> common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need to >>>>>>>>>>>>> devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> constituted and why? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been able to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU >>>>>>>>>>>>>> WCIT was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> important, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and outside >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having >>>>>>>>>>>>>> hidden agendas >>>>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So >>>>>>>>>>>>>> whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and informal, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in us >>>>>>>>>>>>>> investing >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> processes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could resuscitate >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I >>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think >>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -O - >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sivasubramanian M >>> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com >>> >>> --- >>> To unsubscribe: >>> List help: >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Peter Taiwo Akinremi >> about.me/petertaiwoakinremi >> >> > -- Peter Taiwo Akinremi about.me/petertaiwoakinremi -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JFQueralt at theiofoundation.org Thu Apr 4 19:04:18 2019 From: JFQueralt at theiofoundation.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Jean_F=2E_Qu=C3=A9ralt?=) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 01:04:18 +0200 Subject: [governance] TIOF - TOR training at RightsCon. Message-ID: Dear all, During a session today at IFF with some TOR members I've proposed to consider a training on TOR for Civil Society since RightsCon was in their agenda. I'll probably meet them tomorrow and will raise this option again so I'd like to know how many of you, tentatively, would be interested in this. @Carolina & Nikki: Should this move forward, would it be possible to arrange for a space? @RiseUp: I am not familiar with your distribution list so I am not sure this is the right channel to address this proposal. I have decided to give it a try for considering that it's worth asking. Please advise if I should have proceeded differently. Best, Jean -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Sat Apr 6 03:54:59 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (sivasubramanian muthusamy (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2019 13:24:59 +0530 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: Dear Akinremi, I was wondering if the discussion so far has reached the participants of the Governance list, especially the thinking that "discussion about merging should be limited to each group". If riseup.net is working, then I do not have concerns. Thank you. Sivasubramanian M twitter.com/shivaindia On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 1:05 PM Akinremi Peter Taiwo wrote: > Hi Sivasubramanian, > > I don't understand what you mean by saying igcaucus.org mailbox is not > receiving messages. IGC is currently hosted on riseup.net mailing-list. > Please can you help me understand what you are trying to do so as to be > able to help. > > Regards. > Peter > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 4:12 AM sivasubramanian muthusamy < > 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> I wasn't aware that it was formally decided by the Bestbits list to >> discuss this list-wise. Posting a note here on a different problem. The >> igcaucus. org mailbox is NOT receiving messages, who is managing the >> Governance lists please? >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> twitter.com/shivaindia >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 8:03 PM Akinremi Peter Taiwo < >> compsoftnet at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Sivasubramanian, >>> >>> I think what was agreed was that the survey should be limited to Bestbit >>> only and that the discussion about merging should be limited to each group. >>> This would enable each group to do a kind of an independent assessment that >>> would inform the decision of whether the group should cease or merge. Also, >>> I could remember that some folks on the IGC group wants IGC to remain as it >>> is. >>> >>> @Deirdre Williams I remembered I openly shared some contacts on the IGC >>> list back then, which might be the privacy issue you are referring to. >>> Aside of that, I don't think I was in the picture of any privacy issue that >>> affected the group. Maybe Jeremy could throw more light on this. >>> >>> I could also remembered during the review of CSCG, part of our >>> discussion was to accommodate regional civil society organization in the >>> sphere of IG but the challenge of the individual wearing many hat remains. >>> >>> Regards. >>> Peter >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 9:41 PM Sivasubramanian M < >>> governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote: >>> >>>> With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only about >>>> 8 respondents. >>>> >>>> Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll >>>> announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. >>>> (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than >>>> say "future of IG Civil Society". >>>> >>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >>>>> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >>>>> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >>>>> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >>>>> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >>>>> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >>>>> on the issues we work on. >>>>> >>>>> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >>>>> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >>>>> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >>>>> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >>>>> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >>>>> forward. >>>>> >>>>> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be >>>>> great if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and >>>>> set up a room. >>>>> >>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >>>>> >>>>> *Suggested agenda* >>>>> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >>>>> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >>>>> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >>>>> >>>>> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> Sheetal. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have >>>>>> attached the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included >>>>>> at the top in case useful. >>>>>> >>>>>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half >>>>>> spent discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 >>>>>> hour) and the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other >>>>>> key members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>>>>> >>>>>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way to >>>>>> promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change the >>>>>> current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way forward >>>>>> which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible range of >>>>>> opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, please do >>>>>> chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up call. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks again. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great to >>>>>>> hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill out >>>>>>> the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next >>>>>>> steps next week. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to those >>>>>>>> who have responded already. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, >>>>>>>> by using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set >>>>>>>> of discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a >>>>>>>>> survey below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a >>>>>>>>> call on February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it >>>>>>>>> was agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>>>>> calls. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to >>>>>>>>> complete the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please >>>>>>>>> complete the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any questions >>>>>>>>> at all, don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For >>>>>>>>>> those who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants >>>>>>>>>> and notes here: >>>>>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and >>>>>>>>>> IGC have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, >>>>>>>>>> particularly when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a >>>>>>>>>> survey to both lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward >>>>>>>>>> which were discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with >>>>>>>>>> the broader communities feed into a decision on the future of the >>>>>>>>>> platforms. The survey will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, >>>>>>>>>> and your participation would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is >>>>>>>>>>> this coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full >>>>>>>>>>> details are included in my previous email and I've updated the >>>>>>>>>>> etherpad >>>>>>>>>>> with those planning to attend. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time >>>>>>>>>>>> for the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full details >>>>>>>>>>>> of the call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward to >>>>>>>>>>>> speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will appear >>>>>>>>>>>> on the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the link with >>>>>>>>>>>> the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if you do not >>>>>>>>>>>> want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you call in. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing devices: >>>>>>>>>>>> pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>>>>> and I've >>>>>>>>>>>> also added the names of those who indicated they were available for the >>>>>>>>>>>> call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the call >>>>>>>>>>>> without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea of >>>>>>>>>>>> numbers. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and >>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant >>>>>>>>>>>>> documents too. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base again >>>>>>>>>>>>> in the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here >>>>>>>>>>>>> provide rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to >>>>>>>>>>>>> set up a conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to decide >>>>>>>>>>>>> next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we suggest >>>>>>>>>>>>> only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to some IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>> folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion only. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next week >>>>>>>>>>>>> (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link too. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> couple of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>>> information/discussing things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>> separately, would merging the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started >>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>> would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> us also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> identifying volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constituted and why? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been able to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WCIT was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> important, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outside of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hidden agendas >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and informal, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us investing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> processes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could resuscitate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -O - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com >>>> >>>> --- >>>> To unsubscribe: >>>> List help: >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> Peter Taiwo Akinremi >>> about.me/petertaiwoakinremi >>> >>> >> > > -- > > > Peter Taiwo Akinremi > about.me/petertaiwoakinremi > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sheetal at gp-digital.org Mon Apr 8 08:39:46 2019 From: sheetal at gp-digital.org (Sheetal Kumar) Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 13:39:46 +0100 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: Dear all As promised, please find below the details for meeting us on *Wednesday, April 10 at 1 PM UTC*. I've included the agenda further below too. Looking forward to speaking to you then! Best Sheetal. Meeting room details *Meeting URL* https://bluejeans.com/524189381?src=join_info Meeting ID 524 189 381 Want to dial in from a phone? Dial one of the following numbers: +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) (see all numbers - https://www.bluejeans.com/premium-numbers) Enter the meeting ID and passcode followed by # Connecting from a room system? Dial: bjn.vc or 199.48.152.152 and enter your meeting ID & passcode Any civil society stakeholders interested in the discussion around improving coordination are welcome so please share with anyone relevant. Suggested agenda 1) Grounding: why are we having this discussion/a recap of what's happened so far 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward 3) Meeting at RightsCon? On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 at 08:55, sivasubramanian muthusamy <6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear Akinremi, > > I was wondering if the discussion so far has reached the participants of > the Governance list, especially the thinking that "discussion about > merging should be limited to each group". If riseup.net is working, then > I do not have concerns. > > Thank you. > > Sivasubramanian M > twitter.com/shivaindia > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 1:05 PM Akinremi Peter Taiwo > wrote: > >> Hi Sivasubramanian, >> >> I don't understand what you mean by saying igcaucus.org mailbox is not >> receiving messages. IGC is currently hosted on riseup.net mailing-list. >> Please can you help me understand what you are trying to do so as to be >> able to help. >> >> Regards. >> Peter >> >> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 4:12 AM sivasubramanian muthusamy < >> 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> I wasn't aware that it was formally decided by the Bestbits list to >>> discuss this list-wise. Posting a note here on a different problem. The >>> igcaucus. org mailbox is NOT receiving messages, who is managing the >>> Governance lists please? >>> >>> Sivasubramanian M >>> twitter.com/shivaindia >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 8:03 PM Akinremi Peter Taiwo < >>> compsoftnet at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Sivasubramanian, >>>> >>>> I think what was agreed was that the survey should be limited to >>>> Bestbit only and that the discussion about merging should be limited to >>>> each group. This would enable each group to do a kind of an independent >>>> assessment that would inform the decision of whether the group should cease >>>> or merge. Also, I could remember that some folks on the IGC group wants IGC >>>> to remain as it is. >>>> >>>> @Deirdre Williams I remembered I openly shared some contacts on the IGC >>>> list back then, which might be the privacy issue you are referring to. >>>> Aside of that, I don't think I was in the picture of any privacy issue that >>>> affected the group. Maybe Jeremy could throw more light on this. >>>> >>>> I could also remembered during the review of CSCG, part of our >>>> discussion was to accommodate regional civil society organization in the >>>> sphere of IG but the challenge of the individual wearing many hat remains. >>>> >>>> Regards. >>>> Peter >>>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 9:41 PM Sivasubramanian M < >>>> governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only about >>>>> 8 respondents. >>>>> >>>>> Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll >>>>> announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. >>>>> (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than >>>>> say "future of IG Civil Society". >>>>> >>>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >>>>>> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >>>>>> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >>>>>> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >>>>>> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >>>>>> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >>>>>> on the issues we work on. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >>>>>> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >>>>>> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >>>>>> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >>>>>> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >>>>>> forward. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be >>>>>> great if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and >>>>>> set up a room. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >>>>>> >>>>>> *Suggested agenda* >>>>>> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >>>>>> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >>>>>> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >>>>>> >>>>>> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have >>>>>>> attached the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included >>>>>>> at the top in case useful. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half >>>>>>> spent discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 >>>>>>> hour) and the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other >>>>>>> key members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way >>>>>>> to promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change >>>>>>> the current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way >>>>>>> forward which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible >>>>>>> range of opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, >>>>>>> please do chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up >>>>>>> call. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks again. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great >>>>>>>> to hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill >>>>>>>> out the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next >>>>>>>> steps next week. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to those >>>>>>>>> who have responded already. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, >>>>>>>>> by using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set >>>>>>>>> of discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a >>>>>>>>>> survey below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a >>>>>>>>>> call on February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it >>>>>>>>>> was agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>>>>>> calls. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to >>>>>>>>>> complete the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please >>>>>>>>>> complete the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any questions >>>>>>>>>> at all, don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For >>>>>>>>>>> those who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants >>>>>>>>>>> and notes here: >>>>>>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and >>>>>>>>>>> IGC have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, >>>>>>>>>>> particularly when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a >>>>>>>>>>> survey to both lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward >>>>>>>>>>> which were discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with >>>>>>>>>>> the broader communities feed into a decision on the future of the >>>>>>>>>>> platforms. The survey will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, >>>>>>>>>>> and your participation would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is >>>>>>>>>>>> this coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full >>>>>>>>>>>> details are included in my previous email and I've updated the >>>>>>>>>>>> etherpad >>>>>>>>>>>> with those planning to attend. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time >>>>>>>>>>>>> for the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full details >>>>>>>>>>>>> of the call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward to >>>>>>>>>>>>> speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will appear >>>>>>>>>>>>> on the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the link with >>>>>>>>>>>>> the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if you do not >>>>>>>>>>>>> want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you call in. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing devices: >>>>>>>>>>>>> pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>>>>>> and I've >>>>>>>>>>>>> also added the names of those who indicated they were available for the >>>>>>>>>>>>> call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the call >>>>>>>>>>>>> without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea of >>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant >>>>>>>>>>>>>> documents too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base >>>>>>>>>>>>>> again in the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here >>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> set up a conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to decide >>>>>>>>>>>>>> next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we suggest >>>>>>>>>>>>>> only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to some IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>>> folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion only. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next week >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couple of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information/discussing things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separately, would merging the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of us also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> identifying volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constituted and why? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been able to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WCIT was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was important, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outside of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hidden agendas >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> informal, pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us investing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> processes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resuscitate Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -O - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>> >>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>>> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> To unsubscribe: >>>>> List help: >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> Peter Taiwo Akinremi >>>> about.me/petertaiwoakinremi >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> >> Peter Taiwo Akinremi >> about.me/petertaiwoakinremi >> >> > -- *Sheetal Kumar* Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Tue Apr 2 01:21:11 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Remmy Nweke (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 06:21:11 +0100 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: Hi Siva May be it could be resent/reshared with civil society on the subject as you suggested. Regards Remmy Nweke ____ REMMY NWEKE, mNGE, Lead Consulting Strategist/Group Executive Editor, DigitalSENSE Africa Media [*Multiple-award winning medium*] (DigitalSENSE Business News ; ITREALMS , NaijaAgroNet ) Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza, Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475, T: @ITRealms Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria *2019 Nigeria DigitalSENSE Forum on IG4D & Nigeria IPv6 Roundtable * JOIN us!! *Vice President, African Civil Society on the Information Society (ACSIS ) *NPOC FC Rep @ICANN Non-Commercial Stakeholders Group (NCSG)* _________________________________________________________________ *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make any copies. Violators may face court persecution. On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 9:41 PM Sivasubramanian M < governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote: > With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only about 8 > respondents. > > Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll > announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. > (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than > say "future of IG Civil Society". > > Sivasubramanian M > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar > wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >> on the issues we work on. >> >> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >> forward. >> >> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be great >> if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and set up a >> room. >> >> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >> >> *Suggested agenda* >> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >> >> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >> >> Best >> Sheetal. >> >> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >> wrote: >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have attached >>> the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included at the >>> top in case useful. >>> >>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half spent >>> discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 hour) and >>> the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other key >>> members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>> >>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way to >>> promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change the >>> current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way forward >>> which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible range of >>> opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, please do >>> chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up call. >>> >>> Thanks again. >>> >>> Best >>> Sheetal. >>> >>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great to >>>> hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill out >>>> the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>> >>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>> >>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>> >>>> index&sid=528319 >>>> >>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next >>>> steps next week. >>>> >>>> Thank you! >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Sheetal. >>>> >>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to those who >>>>> have responded already. >>>>> >>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, by >>>>> using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set of >>>>> discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>> >>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>> >>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>> >>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> Sheetal. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a survey >>>>>> below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a call on >>>>>> February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it was >>>>>> agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>> >>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>> calls. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>> >>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to complete >>>>>> the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please complete >>>>>> the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any questions at all, >>>>>> don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>> >>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> >>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For those >>>>>>> who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants and >>>>>>> notes here: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and IGC >>>>>>> have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, particularly >>>>>>> when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a survey to both >>>>>>> lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward which were >>>>>>> discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with the broader >>>>>>> communities feed into a decision on the future of the platforms. The survey >>>>>>> will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, and your participation >>>>>>> would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is this >>>>>>>> coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full details >>>>>>>> are included in my previous email and I've updated the etherpad >>>>>>>> with those >>>>>>>> planning to attend. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time for >>>>>>>>> the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full details of the >>>>>>>>> call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward to >>>>>>>>> speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will appear on >>>>>>>>> the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the link with >>>>>>>>> the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if you do not >>>>>>>>> want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you call in. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in each >>>>>>>>> network >>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing devices: >>>>>>>>> pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>> and I've >>>>>>>>> also added the names of those who indicated they were available for the >>>>>>>>> call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the call >>>>>>>>> without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea of >>>>>>>>> numbers. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and thanks >>>>>>>>>> to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant documents too. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base again in >>>>>>>>>> the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here provide >>>>>>>>>> rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to set up a >>>>>>>>>> conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to decide >>>>>>>>>> next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we suggest >>>>>>>>>> only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to some IGC >>>>>>>>>> folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion only. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next week >>>>>>>>>> (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link too. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a couple >>>>>>>>>>> of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy are >>>>>>>>>>> saying. >>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing information/discussing >>>>>>>>>>> things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits separately, would merging >>>>>>>>>>> the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, what >>>>>>>>>>> we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started IGC >>>>>>>>>>> and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that we >>>>>>>>>>> would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many of us >>>>>>>>>>> also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with identifying >>>>>>>>>>> volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and find a >>>>>>>>>>> common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need to >>>>>>>>>>> devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee of >>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was constituted >>>>>>>>>>>> and why? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had been >>>>>>>>>>>> able to >>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU WCIT >>>>>>>>>>>> was >>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action was >>>>>>>>>>>> important, >>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and outside >>>>>>>>>>>> of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven the >>>>>>>>>>>> IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having hidden >>>>>>>>>>>> agendas >>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So >>>>>>>>>>>> whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and informal, >>>>>>>>>>>> pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in us >>>>>>>>>>>> investing >>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and >>>>>>>>>>>> processes. >>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could resuscitate >>>>>>>>>>>> Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I don't >>>>>>>>>>>> think >>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd >>>>>>>>>>>> like to >>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - -O - >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" >>>>>>>>>>> Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> >> *Sheetal Kumar* >> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > -- > Sivasubramanian M > Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com > > --- > To unsubscribe: > List help: > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JFQueralt at theiofoundation.org Tue Apr 9 12:24:42 2019 From: JFQueralt at theiofoundation.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Jean_F=2E_Qu=C3=A9ralt?=) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 00:24:42 +0800 Subject: [governance] TIOF - TOR training at RightsCon. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all, Adding to this, please note that there would also be an opportunity to include a training on OONI in the same session. Anyone interested please reach out privately to me so I can organize. Thanks. Best, Jean On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 7:04 AM Jean F. Quéralt < JFQueralt at theiofoundation.org> wrote: > Dear all, > > During a session today at IFF with some TOR members I've proposed to > consider a training on TOR for Civil Society since RightsCon was in their > agenda. > > I'll probably meet them tomorrow and will raise this option again so I'd > like to know how many of you, tentatively, would be interested in this. > > @Carolina & Nikki: > Should this move forward, would it be possible to arrange for a space? > > @RiseUp: I am not familiar with your distribution list so I am not sure > this is the right channel to address this proposal. I have decided to give > it a try for considering that it's worth asking. Please advise if I should > have proceeded differently. > > Best, > Jean > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From katitza at eff.org Tue Apr 9 16:45:55 2019 From: katitza at eff.org (Katitza) Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:45:55 -0700 Subject: [governance] Job Opportunity: International Policy Director at EFF Message-ID: <1c499b59-9b3f-9b30-32dd-db052b6ea88d@eff.org> Estimados: We're really excited to be hiring for a new role within EFF -- an International Policy Director! You can read the job description here: https://eff.bamboohr.com/jobs/view.php?id=32 We’re looking to recruit someone with deep expertise in European Union lawmaking, global copyright law, and intermediary liability issues as well as substantive experience in management. This new role will help serve as a bridge between our international policy work and the larger EFF legal team. We would really appreciate any assistance you could offer in helping us get the word out about this new position - by posting it to coalition lists, sending it to friends you know, posting it on social media, and letting us know if there are any candidates you’d suggest. Deadline to apply due April 23rd. Come work with us. Thank you so much. Best, Katitza Rodriguez International Rights Director Electronic Frontier Foundation From joly at punkcast.com Wed Apr 10 06:22:48 2019 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 06:22:48 -0400 Subject: [governance] WEBCAST MON-THU:Internet Society African Chapters Advocacy Meeting Message-ID: This is just breaking for lunch on the 3rd of 4 days. Today is 'Internet Society Day' so there is a fair bit of ISOC shop talk. [image: livestream] From *Monday April 8 2019 to Thursday April 11 2019* the *Internet Society African Chapters Advocacy Meeting * is taking place in Addis Ababa. This meeting will mobilize, empower and engage the African chapters’ representatives to advance the Internet Society 2019 focus areas and initiatives in the Africa region with a special focus on “*Building Trust*”. The event is being webcast live on the *Internet Society Livestream Channel *. *VIEW ON LIVESTREAM: https://livestream.com/internetsociety/acam19 * *AGENDA https://www.internetsociety.org/events/2019-african-chapters-advocacy-meeting/agenda/ * *TWIITER: @ISOC_Africa https://bit.ly/isocafrica * *Permalink* https://isoc.live/11026/ - -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast -------------------------------------------------------------- - -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Wed Apr 10 08:29:35 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Deirdre Williams (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:29:35 -0400 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: Thanks for the reminder. I may be a bit late but my intention is to join you De On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 08:11, Sheetal Kumar wrote: > Dear all, > > This is just a quick reminder that we'll be meeting in under an hour at 1 > PM UTC (see the link below). > > Looking forward to speaking to you then! > > Best > Sheetal. > > Meeting room details > > *Meeting URL* > https://bluejeans.com/524189381?src=join_info > > Meeting ID > 524 189 381 > Want to dial in from a phone? > > Dial one of the following numbers: > +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) > +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) > (see all numbers - https://www.bluejeans.com/premium-numbers) > > Enter the meeting ID and passcode followed by # > > Connecting from a room system? > Dial: bjn.vc or 199.48.152.152 and enter your meeting ID & passcode > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 at 13:39, Sheetal Kumar wrote: > >> Dear all >> >> As promised, please find below the details for meeting us on *Wednesday, >> April 10 at 1 PM UTC*. I've included the agenda further below too. >> >> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >> >> Best >> Sheetal. >> >> Meeting room details >> >> *Meeting URL* >> https://bluejeans.com/524189381?src=join_info >> >> Meeting ID >> 524 189 381 >> Want to dial in from a phone? >> >> Dial one of the following numbers: >> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >> (see all numbers - https://www.bluejeans.com/premium-numbers) >> >> Enter the meeting ID and passcode followed by # >> >> Connecting from a room system? >> Dial: bjn.vc or 199.48.152.152 and enter your meeting ID & passcode >> >> Any civil society stakeholders interested in the discussion around >> improving coordination are welcome so please share with anyone relevant. >> >> Suggested agenda >> 1) Grounding: why are we having this discussion/a recap of what's >> happened so far >> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >> >> >> On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 at 08:55, sivasubramanian muthusamy < >> 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> Dear Akinremi, >>> >>> I was wondering if the discussion so far has reached the participants of >>> the Governance list, especially the thinking that "discussion about >>> merging should be limited to each group". If riseup.net is working, >>> then I do not have concerns. >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> Sivasubramanian M >>> twitter.com/shivaindia >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 1:05 PM Akinremi Peter Taiwo < >>> compsoftnet at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Sivasubramanian, >>>> >>>> I don't understand what you mean by saying igcaucus.org mailbox is not >>>> receiving messages. IGC is currently hosted on riseup.net >>>> mailing-list. Please can you help me understand what you are trying to do >>>> so as to be able to help. >>>> >>>> Regards. >>>> Peter >>>> >>>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 4:12 AM sivasubramanian muthusamy < >>>> 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I wasn't aware that it was formally decided by the Bestbits list to >>>>> discuss this list-wise. Posting a note here on a different problem. The >>>>> igcaucus. org mailbox is NOT receiving messages, who is managing the >>>>> Governance lists please? >>>>> >>>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>>> twitter.com/shivaindia >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 8:03 PM Akinremi Peter Taiwo < >>>>> compsoftnet at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Sivasubramanian, >>>>>> >>>>>> I think what was agreed was that the survey should be limited to >>>>>> Bestbit only and that the discussion about merging should be limited to >>>>>> each group. This would enable each group to do a kind of an independent >>>>>> assessment that would inform the decision of whether the group should cease >>>>>> or merge. Also, I could remember that some folks on the IGC group wants IGC >>>>>> to remain as it is. >>>>>> >>>>>> @Deirdre Williams I remembered I openly shared some contacts on the >>>>>> IGC list back then, which might be the privacy issue you are referring to. >>>>>> Aside of that, I don't think I was in the picture of any privacy issue that >>>>>> affected the group. Maybe Jeremy could throw more light on this. >>>>>> >>>>>> I could also remembered during the review of CSCG, part of our >>>>>> discussion was to accommodate regional civil society organization in the >>>>>> sphere of IG but the challenge of the individual wearing many hat remains. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards. >>>>>> Peter >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 9:41 PM Sivasubramanian M < >>>>>> governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only >>>>>>> about 8 respondents. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll >>>>>>> announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. >>>>>>> (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than >>>>>>> say "future of IG Civil Society". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >>>>>>>> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >>>>>>>> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >>>>>>>> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >>>>>>>> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >>>>>>>> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >>>>>>>> on the issues we work on. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >>>>>>>> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >>>>>>>> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >>>>>>>> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >>>>>>>> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >>>>>>>> forward. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be >>>>>>>> great if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and >>>>>>>> set up a room. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Suggested agenda* >>>>>>>> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >>>>>>>> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >>>>>>>> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have >>>>>>>>> attached the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included >>>>>>>>> at the top in case useful. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half >>>>>>>>> spent discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 >>>>>>>>> hour) and the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other >>>>>>>>> key members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way >>>>>>>>> to promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change >>>>>>>>> the current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way >>>>>>>>> forward which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible >>>>>>>>> range of opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, >>>>>>>>> please do chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up >>>>>>>>> call. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks again. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great >>>>>>>>>> to hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill >>>>>>>>>> out the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide >>>>>>>>>> next steps next week. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to >>>>>>>>>>> those who have responded already. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you >>>>>>>>>>> can, by using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next >>>>>>>>>>> set of discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a >>>>>>>>>>>> survey below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a >>>>>>>>>>>> call on February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it >>>>>>>>>>>> was agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>>>>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>>>>>>>> calls. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to >>>>>>>>>>>> complete the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please >>>>>>>>>>>> complete the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any >>>>>>>>>>>> questions at all, don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For >>>>>>>>>>>>> those who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants >>>>>>>>>>>>> and notes here: >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and >>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, >>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a >>>>>>>>>>>>> survey to both lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward >>>>>>>>>>>>> which were discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with >>>>>>>>>>>>> the broader communities feed into a decision on the future of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> platforms. The survey will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, >>>>>>>>>>>>> and your participation would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full >>>>>>>>>>>>>> details are included in my previous email and I've updated the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> etherpad >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> those planning to attend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> details of the call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appear on the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> link with the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you do not want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> call in. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in each network >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decision making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've also added the names of those who indicated they were available for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> call without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of numbers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> documents too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again in the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> set up a conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decide next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in each network >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decision making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggest only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some IGC folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couple of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information/discussing things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separately, would merging the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of us also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> identifying volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find a common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constituted and why? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had been able to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ITU WCIT was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was important, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outside of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hidden agendas >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> informal, pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in us investing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and processes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resuscitate Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - -O - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 173B E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>>>>> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe: >>>>>>> List help: >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Peter Taiwo Akinremi >>>>>> about.me/petertaiwoakinremi >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> Peter Taiwo Akinremi >>>> about.me/petertaiwoakinremi >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> >> *Sheetal Kumar* >> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >> >> > > -- > > > *Sheetal Kumar* > Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 > DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org Wed Apr 10 09:10:12 2019 From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 16:10:12 +0300 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190410131012.GA17542@auk.tarvainen.info> I couldn't get bluejeans to work for me. I trust someone will report on the meeting. Regards, -- Tapani Tarvainen On huhti 10 13:11, Sheetal Kumar (sheetal at gp-digital.org) wrote: > Dear all, > > This is just a quick reminder that we'll be meeting in under an hour at 1 > PM UTC (see the link below). > > Looking forward to speaking to you then! > > Best > Sheetal. > > Meeting room details > > *Meeting URL* > https://bluejeans.com/524189381?src=join_info > > Meeting ID > 524 189 381 > Want to dial in from a phone? > > Dial one of the following numbers: > +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) > +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) > (see all numbers - https://www.bluejeans.com/premium-numbers) > > Enter the meeting ID and passcode followed by # > > Connecting from a room system? > Dial: bjn.vc or 199.48.152.152 and enter your meeting ID & passcode > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 at 13:39, Sheetal Kumar wrote: > > > Dear all > > > > As promised, please find below the details for meeting us on *Wednesday, > > April 10 at 1 PM UTC*. I've included the agenda further below too. > > > > Looking forward to speaking to you then! > > > > Best > > Sheetal. > > > > Meeting room details > > > > *Meeting URL* > > https://bluejeans.com/524189381?src=join_info > > > > Meeting ID > > 524 189 381 > > Want to dial in from a phone? > > > > Dial one of the following numbers: > > +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) > > +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) > > (see all numbers - https://www.bluejeans.com/premium-numbers) > > > > Enter the meeting ID and passcode followed by # > > > > Connecting from a room system? > > Dial: bjn.vc or 199.48.152.152 and enter your meeting ID & passcode > > > > Any civil society stakeholders interested in the discussion around > > improving coordination are welcome so please share with anyone relevant. > > > > Suggested agenda > > 1) Grounding: why are we having this discussion/a recap of what's happened > > so far > > 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion > > 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward > > 3) Meeting at RightsCon? > > > > > > On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 at 08:55, sivasubramanian muthusamy < > > 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > >> Dear Akinremi, > >> > >> I was wondering if the discussion so far has reached the participants of > >> the Governance list, especially the thinking that "discussion about > >> merging should be limited to each group". If riseup.net is working, > >> then I do not have concerns. > >> > >> Thank you. > >> > >> Sivasubramanian M > >> twitter.com/shivaindia > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 1:05 PM Akinremi Peter Taiwo < > >> compsoftnet at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Sivasubramanian, > >>> > >>> I don't understand what you mean by saying igcaucus.org mailbox is not > >>> receiving messages. IGC is currently hosted on riseup.net mailing-list. > >>> Please can you help me understand what you are trying to do so as to be > >>> able to help. > >>> > >>> Regards. > >>> Peter > >>> > >>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 4:12 AM sivasubramanian muthusamy < > >>> 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> I wasn't aware that it was formally decided by the Bestbits list to > >>>> discuss this list-wise. Posting a note here on a different problem. The > >>>> igcaucus. org mailbox is NOT receiving messages, who is managing the > >>>> Governance lists please? > >>>> > >>>> Sivasubramanian M > >>>> twitter.com/shivaindia > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 8:03 PM Akinremi Peter Taiwo < > >>>> compsoftnet at gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi Sivasubramanian, > >>>>> > >>>>> I think what was agreed was that the survey should be limited to > >>>>> Bestbit only and that the discussion about merging should be limited to > >>>>> each group. This would enable each group to do a kind of an independent > >>>>> assessment that would inform the decision of whether the group should cease > >>>>> or merge. Also, I could remember that some folks on the IGC group wants IGC > >>>>> to remain as it is. > >>>>> > >>>>> @Deirdre Williams I remembered I openly shared some contacts on the > >>>>> IGC list back then, which might be the privacy issue you are referring to. > >>>>> Aside of that, I don't think I was in the picture of any privacy issue that > >>>>> affected the group. Maybe Jeremy could throw more light on this. > >>>>> > >>>>> I could also remembered during the review of CSCG, part of our > >>>>> discussion was to accommodate regional civil society organization in the > >>>>> sphere of IG but the challenge of the individual wearing many hat remains. > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards. > >>>>> Peter > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 9:41 PM Sivasubramanian M < > >>>>> governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only > >>>>>> about 8 respondents. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll > >>>>>> announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. > >>>>>> (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than > >>>>>> say "future of IG Civil Society". > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Sivasubramanian M > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar < > >>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Dear all, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these > >>>>>>> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know > >>>>>>> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have > >>>>>>> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation > >>>>>>> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and > >>>>>>> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination > >>>>>>> on the issues we work on. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a > >>>>>>> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of > >>>>>>> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion > >>>>>>> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it > >>>>>>> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way > >>>>>>> forward. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be > >>>>>>> great if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and > >>>>>>> set up a room. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> *Suggested agenda* > >>>>>>> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion > >>>>>>> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward > >>>>>>> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Best > >>>>>>> Sheetal. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Dear all, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have > >>>>>>>> attached the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included > >>>>>>>> at the top in case useful. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half > >>>>>>>> spent discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 > >>>>>>>> hour) and the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other > >>>>>>>> key members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way > >>>>>>>> to promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change > >>>>>>>> the current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way > >>>>>>>> forward which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible > >>>>>>>> range of opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, > >>>>>>>> please do chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up > >>>>>>>> call. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thanks again. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Best > >>>>>>>> Sheetal. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Dear all, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great > >>>>>>>>> to hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill > >>>>>>>>> out the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next > >>>>>>>>> steps next week. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Thank you! > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Best > >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar < > >>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to > >>>>>>>>>> those who have responded already. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, > >>>>>>>>>> by using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set > >>>>>>>>>> of discussions on the future of Bestbits. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Best > >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar < > >>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a > >>>>>>>>>>> survey below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a > >>>>>>>>>>> call on February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it > >>>>>>>>>>> was agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which > >>>>>>>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of > >>>>>>>>>>> calls. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to > >>>>>>>>>>> complete the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please > >>>>>>>>>>> complete the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any > >>>>>>>>>>> questions at all, don't hesitate to get in touch. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Best > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar < > >>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For > >>>>>>>>>>>> those who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants > >>>>>>>>>>>> and notes here: > >>>>>>>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for > >>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the > >>>>>>>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and > >>>>>>>>>>>> IGC have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, > >>>>>>>>>>>> particularly when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a > >>>>>>>>>>>> survey to both lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward > >>>>>>>>>>>> which were discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with > >>>>>>>>>>>> the broader communities feed into a decision on the future of the > >>>>>>>>>>>> platforms. The survey will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, > >>>>>>>>>>>> and your participation would be greatly appreciated. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Best > >>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar < > >>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is > >>>>>>>>>>>>> this coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full > >>>>>>>>>>>>> details are included in my previous email and I've updated the > >>>>>>>>>>>>> etherpad > >>>>>>>>>>>>> with those planning to attend. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar < > >>>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> details of the call, including how to join, are below. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To join via phone : > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> appear on the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> link with the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you do not want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> call in. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> each network > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've also added the names of those who indicated they were available for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> call without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of numbers. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> documents too. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again in the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> set up a conference call space for us. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decide next steps. This is a suggested agenda: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in each network > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decision making regarding future of Bestbits > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggest only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some IGC folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couple of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are saying. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information/discussing things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separately, would merging the two groups again really improve participation? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we want to do, how we want to do it? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> priorities? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we would make much progress. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of us also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> identifying volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find a common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to devise something different? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Bestbits - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constituted and why? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been able to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WCIT was > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was important, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outside of IGC > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committee. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the IGC into > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hidden agendas > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So whereas the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> informal, pressure to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us investing > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and processes. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resuscitate Best Bits, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - -O - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > >>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > >>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B > >>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > >>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > >>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > >>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > >>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B > >>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > >>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > >>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > >>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > >>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B > >>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 > >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 > >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 > >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 > >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ > >>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > >>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > >>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > >>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> Sivasubramanian M > >>>>>> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com > >>>>>> > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> To unsubscribe: > >>>>>> List help: > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Peter Taiwo Akinremi > >>>>> about.me/petertaiwoakinremi > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> > >>> Peter Taiwo Akinremi > >>> about.me/petertaiwoakinremi > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > -- > > > > > > *Sheetal Kumar* > > Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > > T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > > PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 > > DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > > > > > -- > > > *Sheetal Kumar* > Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 DD7F > E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits From governance at lists.riseup.net Wed Apr 10 09:39:43 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Ars=C3=A8ne?= Tungali (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:39:43 +0200 Subject: [governance] Deadline EXTENDED to 14 April for IGF 2019 Calls Message-ID: FYI Dear Stakeholders, This is to inform you that the deadline for all IGF 2019 programme Calls listed below – including Workshops, Open Forums, DC Sessions, Day 0 Events and IGF Village Booths – has been EXTENDED to Sunday 14 April, 23:59 UTC Please do not hesitate to contact the Secretariat with any queries regarding submissions. Best regards, Eleonora ------------------------ **Arsène Tungali* * Co-Founder & Executive Director, *Rudi international *, CEO,* Smart Services Sarl *, Tel: +243 993810967 (DRC) GPG: 523644A0 2015 Mandela Washington Fellow < http://tungali.blogspot.com/2015/06/selected-for-2015-mandela-washington.html> (YALI) - ICANN GNSO Council Member Member. UN IGF MAG Member From governance at lists.riseup.net Wed Apr 10 09:43:16 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Capda Capda (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:43:16 +0200 Subject: [governance] Deadline EXTENDED to 14 April for IGF 2019 Calls In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Arsene, This is very good news and I thank you for sharing it. Best regards, Le mer. 10 avr. 2019 à 15:40, Arsène Tungali a écrit : > FYI > > Dear Stakeholders, > > This is to inform you that the deadline for all IGF 2019 programme > Calls listed below – including Workshops, Open Forums, DC Sessions, > Day 0 Events and IGF Village Booths – has been EXTENDED to Sunday 14 > April, 23:59 UTC > > Please do not hesitate to contact the Secretariat with any queries > regarding submissions. > > Best regards, > > Eleonora > ------------------------ > **Arsène Tungali* * > Co-Founder & Executive Director, *Rudi international > *, > CEO,* Smart Services Sarl *, > Tel: +243 993810967 (DRC) > GPG: 523644A0 > > 2015 Mandela Washington Fellow > < > > http://tungali.blogspot.com/2015/06/selected-for-2015-mandela-washington.html > > > > (YALI) - ICANN GNSO Council Member > Member. UN IGF MAG > Member > --- > To unsubscribe: > List help: > -- *Michel TCHONANG LINZE* *Coordinateur Général* *ÉVÈNEMENTS SUR LES TIC :* - *Du 08 au 12 Avril 2019 Forum SMSI à Genève Suisse* - *ICANN65 du 24 au 27 Juin 2019 à Marrakech - Maroc* - *Symposium TIC Afrique du 09 au 12 juillet 2019 à Yaoundé-Cameroun* - * ITU Telecom World du 09 au 12 septembre 2019 à Budapest - Hongrie* - *FGI global à Berlin du 25 au 29 Novembre 2019. * *C**APDA (Consortium d'Appui aux Actions pour la Promotion et le Développement de l'Afrique)* *BP : 15 151 DOUALA - CAMEROUN Tél. : (237) 67775-39-63 / 24212-9493 Email : capdasiege at gmail.com Site : www.capda.ong* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sheetal at gp-digital.org Thu Apr 11 12:30:18 2019 From: sheetal at gp-digital.org (Sheetal Kumar) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:30:18 +0100 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: <20190410131012.GA17542@auk.tarvainen.info> References: <20190410131012.GA17542@auk.tarvainen.info> Message-ID: Dear all, Thanks for those who joined the call yesterday. Once I have the recording I'll send it around. In the meantime, you can see a short summary at the top of the etherpad. Apologies for its staccato nature but it should provide an overview of what we discussed: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture In essence, we discussed the reasons that these discussions about civil society coordination have recently re-surfaced and those on the call reiterated the commitment to global-level coordination and the need to work together in a less fragmented way. We looked at the survey results and discussed the fact that although about half of the respondents supported exploring a 'merger' with IGC, around half also thought expanding the mandate of the CSCG could be an option. However, those on the call mentioned that the historical standing of the IGC is important to leverage and there is complementary between Bestbits and IGCs mandates. Therefore, we shouldn't lose that in whatever we choose to do going forward. We discussed that proposing something more concrete to the IGC would be helpful in terms of how a 'merger' could work. We were cognizant of the limited number of the people on the call, so we agreed to put something short together and then to share it with you for your feedback before sharing it with IGC. At the moment, we're working on that simple proposal to share with you. I'll share it shortly. If anyone else on the call wants to chime in with more information please do. If you have any questions, please do let us know! Best Sheetal. On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 14:10, Tapani Tarvainen wrote: > I couldn't get bluejeans to work for me. I trust someone will > report on the meeting. > > Regards, > > -- > Tapani Tarvainen > > On huhti 10 13:11, Sheetal Kumar (sheetal at gp-digital.org) wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > > This is just a quick reminder that we'll be meeting in under an hour at 1 > > PM UTC (see the link below). > > > > Looking forward to speaking to you then! > > > > Best > > Sheetal. > > > > Meeting room details > > > > *Meeting URL* > > https://bluejeans.com/524189381?src=join_info > > > > Meeting ID > > 524 189 381 > > Want to dial in from a phone? > > > > Dial one of the following numbers: > > +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) > > +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) > > (see all numbers - https://www.bluejeans.com/premium-numbers) > > > > Enter the meeting ID and passcode followed by # > > > > Connecting from a room system? > > Dial: bjn.vc or 199.48.152.152 and enter your meeting ID & passcode > > > > On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 at 13:39, Sheetal Kumar > wrote: > > > > > Dear all > > > > > > As promised, please find below the details for meeting us on > *Wednesday, > > > April 10 at 1 PM UTC*. I've included the agenda further below too. > > > > > > Looking forward to speaking to you then! > > > > > > Best > > > Sheetal. > > > > > > Meeting room details > > > > > > *Meeting URL* > > > https://bluejeans.com/524189381?src=join_info > > > > > > Meeting ID > > > 524 189 381 > > > Want to dial in from a phone? > > > > > > Dial one of the following numbers: > > > +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) > > > +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) > > > (see all numbers - https://www.bluejeans.com/premium-numbers) > > > > > > Enter the meeting ID and passcode followed by # > > > > > > Connecting from a room system? > > > Dial: bjn.vc or 199.48.152.152 and enter your meeting ID & passcode > > > > > > Any civil society stakeholders interested in the discussion around > > > improving coordination are welcome so please share with anyone > relevant. > > > > > > Suggested agenda > > > 1) Grounding: why are we having this discussion/a recap of what's > happened > > > so far > > > 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion > > > 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward > > > 3) Meeting at RightsCon? > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 at 08:55, sivasubramanian muthusamy < > > > 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> Dear Akinremi, > > >> > > >> I was wondering if the discussion so far has reached the participants > of > > >> the Governance list, especially the thinking that "discussion about > > >> merging should be limited to each group". If riseup.net is working, > > >> then I do not have concerns. > > >> > > >> Thank you. > > >> > > >> Sivasubramanian M > > > >> twitter.com/shivaindia > > >> > > >> > > >> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 1:05 PM Akinremi Peter Taiwo < > > >> compsoftnet at gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi Sivasubramanian, > > >>> > > >>> I don't understand what you mean by saying igcaucus.org mailbox is > not > > >>> receiving messages. IGC is currently hosted on riseup.net > mailing-list. > > >>> Please can you help me understand what you are trying to do so as to > be > > >>> able to help. > > >>> > > >>> Regards. > > >>> Peter > > >>> > > >>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 4:12 AM sivasubramanian muthusamy < > > >>> 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>> I wasn't aware that it was formally decided by the Bestbits list to > > >>>> discuss this list-wise. Posting a note here on a different problem. > The > > >>>> igcaucus. org mailbox is NOT receiving messages, who is managing the > > >>>> Governance lists please? > > >>>> > > >>>> Sivasubramanian M < > https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy> > > >>>> twitter.com/shivaindia > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 8:03 PM Akinremi Peter Taiwo < > > >>>> compsoftnet at gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hi Sivasubramanian, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I think what was agreed was that the survey should be limited to > > >>>>> Bestbit only and that the discussion about merging should be > limited to > > >>>>> each group. This would enable each group to do a kind of an > independent > > >>>>> assessment that would inform the decision of whether the group > should cease > > >>>>> or merge. Also, I could remember that some folks on the IGC group > wants IGC > > >>>>> to remain as it is. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> @Deirdre Williams I remembered I openly shared some contacts on the > > >>>>> IGC list back then, which might be the privacy issue you are > referring to. > > >>>>> Aside of that, I don't think I was in the picture of any privacy > issue that > > >>>>> affected the group. Maybe Jeremy could throw more light on this. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I could also remembered during the review of CSCG, part of our > > >>>>> discussion was to accommodate regional civil society organization > in the > > >>>>> sphere of IG but the challenge of the individual wearing many hat > remains. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Regards. > > >>>>> Peter > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 9:41 PM Sivasubramanian M < > > >>>>> governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only > > >>>>>> about 8 respondents. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the > poll > > >>>>>> announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the > IGC list. > > >>>>>> (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" > rather than > > >>>>>> say "future of IG Civil Society". > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Sivasubramanian M > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar < > > >>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Dear all, > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these > > >>>>>>> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, > and I know > > >>>>>>> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The > conversations have > > >>>>>>> been premised on a general interest in changing the current > situation > > >>>>>>> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and > > >>>>>>> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society > coordination > > >>>>>>> on the issues we work on. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which > gathered a > > >>>>>>> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary > report of > > >>>>>>> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was > discussion > > >>>>>>> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that > however, it > > >>>>>>> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a > way > > >>>>>>> forward. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would > be > > >>>>>>> great if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the > date and > > >>>>>>> set up a room. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> *Suggested agenda* > > >>>>>>> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion > > >>>>>>> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward > > >>>>>>> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so > far! > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Best > > >>>>>>> Sheetal. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar < > sheetal at gp-digital.org> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Dear all, > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have > > >>>>>>>> attached the anonymised results as a text document, with a > summary included > > >>>>>>>> at the top in case useful. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half > > >>>>>>>> spent discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 > minutes-1 > > >>>>>>>> hour) and the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC > founders and other > > >>>>>>>> key members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call > too. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a > way > > >>>>>>>> to promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change > > >>>>>>>> the current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding > a way > > >>>>>>>> forward which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest > possible > > >>>>>>>> range of opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how > to proceed, > > >>>>>>>> please do chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a > follow up > > >>>>>>>> call. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Thanks again. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Best > > >>>>>>>> Sheetal. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar < > sheetal at gp-digital.org> > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Dear all, > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be > great > > >>>>>>>>> to hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you > could fill > > >>>>>>>>> out the survey by COB this Friday that would be much > appreciated. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ > > >>>>>>>>> < > http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319> > > >>>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ > > >>>>>>>>> < > http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319> > > >>>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 > > >>>>>>>>> < > http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319> > > >>>>>>>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide > next > > >>>>>>>>> steps next week. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Thank you! > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Best > > >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar < > > >>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to > > >>>>>>>>>> those who have responded already. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you > can, > > >>>>>>>>>> by using the link below. The survey responses will feed into > the next set > > >>>>>>>>>> of discussions on the future of Bestbits. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ > > >>>>>>>>>> < > http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319> > > >>>>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ > > >>>>>>>>>> < > http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319> > > >>>>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 > > >>>>>>>>>> < > http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319> > > >>>>>>>>>> Best > > >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar < > > >>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a > > >>>>>>>>>>> survey below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. > Following a > > >>>>>>>>>>> call on February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as > members of IGC, it > > >>>>>>>>>>> was agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views > of all members. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which > > >>>>>>>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to > the summaries of > > >>>>>>>>>>> calls. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to > > >>>>>>>>>>> complete the survey. To inform future discussions in a > timely way, please > > >>>>>>>>>>> complete the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any > > >>>>>>>>>>> questions at all, don't hesitate to get in touch. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Best > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar < > > >>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. > For > > >>>>>>>>>>>> those who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of > participants > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and notes here: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December > and the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits > and > > >>>>>>>>>>>> IGC have been facing challenges in fulfilling their > objectives, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> particularly when it comes to coordination and we agreed to > circulate a > > >>>>>>>>>>>> survey to both lists to gather perspectives on four > suggested ways forward > > >>>>>>>>>>>> which were discussed on the call. It was suggested that > this survey with > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the broader communities feed into a decision on the future > of the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> platforms. The survey will be circulated shortly to both > lists shortly, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and your participation would be greatly appreciated. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Best > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar < > > >>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps > is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> this coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The > full > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> details are included in my previous email and I've updated > the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> etherpad < > https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> with those planning to attend. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best > time > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> details of the call, including how to join, are below. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking > forward > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To join via phone : > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> appear on the Bluejeans room page. We would like to > record and share the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> link with the BestBits network on the mailing list. > Please let us know if > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you do not want the recording to be shared on an open > mailing list if you > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> call in. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC > lists, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues > faced in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> each network > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of > lists/establishment > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as > information sharing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for > decision > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've also added the names of those who indicated they > were available for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member > you can join the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> call without indicating that in the pad, this is just to > have a vague idea > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of numbers. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks to those who have shared their perspectives and > the relevant > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> documents too. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again in the middle of January to agree a way forward. > The discussions here > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has > kindly offered to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> set up a conference call space for us. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decide next steps. This is a suggested agenda: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues > faced > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in each network > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of > lists/establishment > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as > information sharing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decision making regarding future of Bestbits > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggest only Bestbits members are invited but that we > also reach out to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some IGC folks to help provide some background and > inform the discussion > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the > conference room link > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have > a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couple of questions which seem to fall in line with > what Nnenna and Jeremy > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are saying. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information/discussing things/ working together within > IGC and Bestbits > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separately, would merging the two groups again really > improve participation? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be > done, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we want to do, how we want to do it? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who > started > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions > and perspectives, same > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> priorities? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely > that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we would make much progress. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which > many > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of us also belong to) which is currently having some > difficulty with > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> identifying volunteers to carry out management tasks > for the group. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find a common voice, but is this the right way to do > that now or do we need > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to devise something different? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering > Committee > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Bestbits - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constituted and why? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it > had > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been able to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 > ITU > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WCIT was > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint > action > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was important, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outside of IGC > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committee. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had > driven > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the IGC into > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hidden agendas > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own > funding. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So whereas the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> informal, pressure to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability > resulted in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us investing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and processes. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resuscitate Best Bits, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. > But I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new > nonprofit > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q > -i > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - -O - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > ____________________________________________________________ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize > Economics, 1979 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D > 173B > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D > 173B > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > > >>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > > >>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B > > >>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > > >>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > >>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > > >>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > > >>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B > > >>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > > >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > > >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > > >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B > E9E2 > > >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > > >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > > >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > > >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B > E9E2 > > >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > > >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > > >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > > >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 > > >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* > > >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > > >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > > >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 > > >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ > > >>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > > >>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > > >>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > > >>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> Sivasubramanian M > > >>>>>> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> --- > > >>>>>> To unsubscribe: > > >>>>>> List help: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -- > > >>>>> > > >>>>> < > https://about.me/petertaiwoakinremi?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api&utm_content=thumb > > > > >>>>> Peter Taiwo Akinremi > > >>>>> about.me/petertaiwoakinremi > > >>>>> < > https://about.me/petertaiwoakinremi?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api&utm_content=thumb > > > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> > > >>> < > https://about.me/petertaiwoakinremi?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api&utm_content=thumb > > > > >>> Peter Taiwo Akinremi > > >>> about.me/petertaiwoakinremi > > >>> < > https://about.me/petertaiwoakinremi?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api&utm_content=thumb > > > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > *Sheetal Kumar* > > > Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > > Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > > > T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > > > PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 > > > DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > *Sheetal Kumar* > > Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > > T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > > PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 > DD7F > > E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- *Sheetal Kumar* Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Fri Apr 12 12:04:52 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Ars=C3=A8ne?= Tungali (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2019 18:04:52 +0200 Subject: [governance] Fwd: MAG 2020 renewal process References: Message-ID: <90A15514-015A-4C80-B60F-941EEB531D97@gmail.com> Hi all, Please see bellow if you qualify to apply for this MAG renewal process. Also, happy to hear what you all think about the MAG chair item in the bellow email. We have been contacted as MAG CS individual reps but we are yet to discuss any formal process for this task of identifying and suggesting 3 names for the chair position. I shall keep you updated on this asap. Regards, Arsene Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: Chengetai Masango > Date: 12 April 2019 at 12:27:56 GMT+2 > To: MAG-public > Subject: [IGFmaglist] MAG 2020 renewal process > > Dear All, > > The IGF Secretariat has published the announcement for the IGF MAG 2020 nomination process on the IGF Website : https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/mag-2020-renewal > > The deadline for submissions is 30 June > > This year we have the smallest number of MAG members rotating out (9). The MAG will also revert back to 50 members from the current 52, as two were added last year to achieve gender parity. As a guideline to maintain the gender parity we are ideally looking for 7 male candidates > > 3 from Africa, (2 Government, 1 Private Sector) > 1 from Asia Pacific, (1 Government) > 1 from Eastern Europe (1 Private Sector) > 2 from GRULAC. (1 Private Sector and 1 Technical Community) > > *Please note this is just a guideline from the IGF Secretariat and I am not saying that people’s names from outside of the above categories should not be submitted. The appointments are the Secretary-General’s prerogative. > > I will also be sending an email to each of the stakeholder groups within the MAG to discuss amongst themselves and consult their constituents, so that they can put a maximum of three names forward for the 2020 MAG Chair. The names do not have to be from the respective stakeholder groups. A stakeholder group can recommend someone from any stakeholder group. The names will be forwarded to the Secretary-General’s office for his consideration. The deadline for this is also 30 June. > > Best regards > > Chengetai > > _______________________________________________ > Igfmaglist mailing list > Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org > To unsubscribe or manage your options please go to http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Sun Apr 14 15:22:03 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (sivasubramanian muthusamy (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 00:52:03 +0530 Subject: [governance] Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy positions? Message-ID: Hello, With a few hours remaining for submission of the 2019 workshops, I intend to propose a workshop. Looking for support from IGC, Besbits and APC, some quick suggestions to improve the text, and more importantly, for suggestions of speakers who have a good understanding of the history of Civil Society in IG. Kindly respond ASAP. title "Is the Civil Society doing enough?" policy question "Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy positions?" relevance to the theme: Though proposed under "Digital Inclusion", it is a workshop across the three themes, and of relevance to the overall design of the multi-stakeholder model of Internet Governance. relevance to Internet Governance: When broadly classified, Civil Society is one of the three stakeholders in Internet Governance. Since WSIS 2005, Civil Society has played a constructive role to bring about a balance in Internet Governance debates. However, a certain degree of imbalance persists as the other stakeholder groups tend to steer policy a little more than proportionately towards their own respective positions. Governments around the world draft legislative directives some of which the Civil Society find undesirable. In some instances, Civil Society positions remarkably differed from that of Government, the proposed Acts such as SOPA or PIPA or Directives were withdrawn, only to be reintroduced and confirmed by some other title or form. Business responds to Civil Society positions, for instance, on Privacy issues, but many of the concerns of Civil Society are not adequately addressed. It could be stated that the other stakeholder groups prevail more than proportionately over Civil Society, in matters related to Internet Governance. This prompts the question, "Is the Civil Society participating enough? Is the Civil Society doing enough?" If not enough, what needs to be done? In Internet Governance, the formal title as "Civil Society" is shared by a somewhat loose collaboration between Internet Governance participants who took up the Civil Society role since WSIS 2005, other early CS participants in the IGF, organizations that pursue issues in public interest including Privacy organizations, Freedom foundations etc, and also organizations such as some Internet Society Chapters, ICANN AtLarge, ICANN Non Commercial Stakeholder Group etc, who partake in Civil Society positions in their own way. If the Civil society is not doing enough, is it because it requires greater interaction among those who pursue Civil Society positions in the IGF? How would Civil Society strengthen itself? Would it also look for Civil Society participation from beyond the IGF arena to bring in newer Civil Society participants to the IGF? These are some, and not all, questions that follow the questions in the title. Workshop session description: The session would revolve around the Title Questions, "Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy positions?" to bring up supplementary questions, and in the process identify its strengths and weaknesses to identify solutions towards strengthening itself for a balance. Sivasubramanian M twitter.com/shivaindia -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Tue Apr 2 03:13:34 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (sivasubramanian muthusamy (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 12:43:34 +0530 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: Is there a comparitive list of best bit subscribers and IGC members? Who is in bestbits while not being part of IGC? Also, what are there other related CS lists discussing IG issues, if not comprehensively, issues such as Privacy, Security, Community Access? Why not invite them to be a part of a larger IG Caucus, irrespective of whether they physically and regularly participate in the global IGF? Is there a way of reaching out to NRIs to ask for the list of CS participants in NRIs? Not merely consolidate, but also expand. A wider CS could bring in creative solutions to the IG process and cause a balance. Sivasubramanian M Sivasubramanian M On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, 5:56 PM Deirdre Williams wrote: > Dear Sivasubramanian, > (Apologies for cross-posting) > Although various people have pointed to the need for a common voice for > civil society in this arena it really seems that there is no longer an > appetite for the individual effort needed for a successful collaboration of > this type. I would be very happy to have this opinion drowned by a chorus > of voices proving me wrong, but I am not expecting to hear them. > So I wonder if we should be looking for a new means to and a new process > for collaboration? > Should this be included in the agenda under 2 - Concrete ways forward? > I don't have any real suggestions. I think that, more now than before, the > process depends on individuals being willing to make a commitment of time > energy and effort, and that this is happening in a context where the > general ethos has lost its encouragement of sharing and communal energy. > It needs to become possible again to perceive a common good. Should this > happen by painstakingly linking very small local initiatives, where the > "common good" is easy to see, rather than attempting things on a global > scale (which in fact is "top down")? > Hopefully the discussion on 9th will take us nearer to a solution. > Best wishes > Deirdre > > On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 at 16:41, Sivasubramanian M <6.Internet at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only about 8 >> respondents. >> >> Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll >> announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. >> (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than >> say "future of IG Civil Society". >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> >> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar >> wrote: >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >>> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >>> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >>> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >>> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >>> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >>> on the issues we work on. >>> >>> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >>> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >>> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >>> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >>> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >>> forward. >>> >>> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be great >>> if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and set up a >>> room. >>> >>> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >>> >>> *Suggested agenda* >>> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >>> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >>> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >>> >>> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >>> >>> Best >>> Sheetal. >>> >>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have attached >>>> the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included at the >>>> top in case useful. >>>> >>>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half spent >>>> discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 hour) and >>>> the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other key >>>> members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>>> >>>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way to >>>> promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change the >>>> current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way forward >>>> which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible range of >>>> opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, please do >>>> chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up call. >>>> >>>> Thanks again. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Sheetal. >>>> >>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great to >>>>> hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill out >>>>> the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>> >>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>> >>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>> >>>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next >>>>> steps next week. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you! >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> Sheetal. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to those >>>>>> who have responded already. >>>>>> >>>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, by >>>>>> using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set of >>>>>> discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>> >>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>> >>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a survey >>>>>>> below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a call on >>>>>>> February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it was >>>>>>> agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>>> calls. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to >>>>>>> complete the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please >>>>>>> complete the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any questions at >>>>>>> all, don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For >>>>>>>> those who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants >>>>>>>> and notes here: >>>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and IGC >>>>>>>> have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, particularly >>>>>>>> when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a survey to both >>>>>>>> lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward which were >>>>>>>> discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with the broader >>>>>>>> communities feed into a decision on the future of the platforms. The survey >>>>>>>> will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, and your participation >>>>>>>> would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is this >>>>>>>>> coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full details >>>>>>>>> are included in my previous email and I've updated the etherpad >>>>>>>>> with those >>>>>>>>> planning to attend. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time for >>>>>>>>>> the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full details of the >>>>>>>>>> call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward to >>>>>>>>>> speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will appear on >>>>>>>>>> the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the link with >>>>>>>>>> the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if you do not >>>>>>>>>> want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you call in. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing devices: >>>>>>>>>> pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>>> and I've >>>>>>>>>> also added the names of those who indicated they were available for the >>>>>>>>>> call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the call >>>>>>>>>> without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea of >>>>>>>>>> numbers. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and thanks >>>>>>>>>>> to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant documents too. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base again >>>>>>>>>>> in the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here >>>>>>>>>>> provide rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to >>>>>>>>>>> set up a conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to decide >>>>>>>>>>> next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we suggest >>>>>>>>>>> only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to some IGC >>>>>>>>>>> folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion only. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next week >>>>>>>>>>> (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link too. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a >>>>>>>>>>>> couple of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy >>>>>>>>>>>> are saying. >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing >>>>>>>>>>>> information/discussing things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>> separately, would merging the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, what >>>>>>>>>>>> we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started IGC >>>>>>>>>>>> and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that we >>>>>>>>>>>> would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many of >>>>>>>>>>>> us also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with >>>>>>>>>>>> identifying volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and find a >>>>>>>>>>>> common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need to >>>>>>>>>>>> devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee of >>>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was >>>>>>>>>>>>> constituted and why? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had >>>>>>>>>>>>> been able to >>>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU >>>>>>>>>>>>> WCIT was >>>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action was >>>>>>>>>>>>> important, >>>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and outside >>>>>>>>>>>>> of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven the >>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having hidden >>>>>>>>>>>>> agendas >>>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So >>>>>>>>>>>>> whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and informal, >>>>>>>>>>>>> pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in us >>>>>>>>>>>>> investing >>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and >>>>>>>>>>>>> processes. >>>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could resuscitate >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I >>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think >>>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>> like to >>>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - -O >>>>>>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" >>>>>>>>>>>> Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> >> -- >> Sivasubramanian M >> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Sun Apr 14 20:41:29 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Alex Comninos (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 02:41:29 +0200 Subject: [governance] IGF BPF on IoT, Big Data and AI Virtual Meeting Today, 15 April 12:00 UTC Message-ID: <1FBB7C0D-FBF8-4D5C-9826-D8D3193329E0@gmail.com> Dear All, Apologies for cross-posting: I would like to urge you all to take part in the Internet Governance Forum (AI) Best Practice Forum (BPF) on AI, Big Data and Internet of Things Virtual Meeting (webinar) today the 15th of April at 12:00 UTC. The Virtual Meeting link is https://intgovforum.webex.com/intgovforum/j.php?MTID=m8018d13f801dfcb5ef0ce3eb64d18ef9 We would love to multistakeholderise participation from diverse communities outside of the traditional IGF community. If you have no ideas what a BPF is or what the IGF is - thats completely understandable, and we aim to rectify that! More info can be found here https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/bpf-internet-of-things-iot-big-data-and-artificial-intelligence-ai The 2019 edition of the Best Practice Forum on IoT, Big Data and AI will focus on trust in these concepts and their utilization for addressing identified societal challenges. 
Within the IGF’s remit, the BPF intends to continue to limit its scope to the growing area where IoT, Big Data and AI meet in an Internet context. Building on this BPF’s 2018 work as a starting point, the BPF proposes for 2019 to: * Challenge and review the identified best practices and complete the report with concrete and practical examples. (e.g. in the field of healthcare, environmental protection, e-commerce, public safety, cybersecurity, and infrastructure; * Identify existing and new ways to enhance trust in IoT, Big Data, AI applications and technologies in an Internet context; * Identify how AI can affect outcomes both in terms of social justice and in terms of the allocation of societal resources; * Identify how AI can complement or pose challenges to privacy and data protection as well as transparency and good governance; * Identify how IoT, Big Data, AI can contribute to achieving the UN SDGs and * Identify the impact on policies and regulations, including policy making processes of the application of IoT, Big Data, AI applications. The Virtual Meeting will require WebEX software which can be downloaded at https://www.webex.com/downloads.html. It should work on all Desktops (Mac, Windows, and Linux with some luck) as well as on mobile phones. One should also be able to phone into the meeting with a phone and the info provided here: https://intgovforum.webex.com/intgovforum/j.php?MTID=m8018d13f801dfcb5ef0ce3eb64d18ef9. If any of you have any questions about what the IGF is, what BPFs are, or how to use WebEx, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best, Alex From governance at lists.riseup.net Mon Apr 15 00:19:28 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Ars=C3=A8ne?= Tungali (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 07:19:28 +0300 Subject: [governance] Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy positions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Siva, Were you finally able to submit this proposal? I note this came in very last minute, i was on a flight so could not comment nor support it’s submission. If it goes to the next stage, then we will have time to reshape it. Good luck, Arsene Sent from my iPhone > On 14 Apr 2019, at 22:22, sivasubramanian muthusamy (via governance Mailing List) wrote: > > Hello, > > > With a few hours remaining for submission of the 2019 workshops, I intend to propose a workshop. Looking for support from IGC, Besbits and APC, some quick suggestions to improve the text, and more importantly, for suggestions of speakers who have a good understanding of the history of Civil Society in IG. > > Kindly respond ASAP. > > title > "Is the Civil Society doing enough?" > policy question > "Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy positions?" > relevance to the theme: > Though proposed under "Digital Inclusion", it is a workshop across the three themes, and of relevance to the overall design of the multi-stakeholder model of Internet Governance. > relevance to Internet Governance: > When broadly classified, Civil Society is one of the three stakeholders in Internet Governance. Since WSIS 2005, Civil Society has played a constructive role to bring about a balance in Internet Governance debates. However, a certain degree of imbalance persists as the other stakeholder groups tend to steer policy a little more than proportionately towards their own respective positions. Governments around the world draft legislative directives some of which the Civil Society find undesirable. In some instances, Civil Society positions remarkably differed from that of Government, the proposed Acts such as SOPA or PIPA or Directives were withdrawn, only to be reintroduced and confirmed by some other title or form. Business responds to Civil Society positions, for instance, on Privacy issues, but many of the concerns of Civil Society are not adequately addressed. It could be stated that the other stakeholder groups prevail more than proportionately over Civil Society, in matters related to Internet Governance. This prompts the question, "Is the Civil Society participating enough? Is the Civil Society doing enough?" > > If not enough, what needs to be done? In Internet Governance, the formal title as "Civil Society" is shared by a somewhat loose collaboration between Internet Governance participants who took up the Civil Society role since WSIS 2005, other early CS participants in the IGF, organizations that pursue issues in public interest including Privacy organizations, Freedom foundations etc, and also organizations such as some Internet Society Chapters, ICANN AtLarge, ICANN Non Commercial Stakeholder Group etc, who partake in Civil Society positions in their own way. > > If the Civil society is not doing enough, is it because it requires greater interaction among those who pursue Civil Society positions in the IGF? How would Civil Society strengthen itself? Would it also look for Civil Society participation from beyond the IGF arena to bring in newer Civil Society participants to the IGF? > > These are some, and not all, questions that follow the questions in the title. > > Workshop session description: > The session would revolve around the Title Questions, "Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy positions?" to bring up supplementary questions, and in the process identify its strengths and weaknesses to identify solutions towards strengthening itself for a balance. > > > Sivasubramanian M > twitter.com/shivaindia > --- > To unsubscribe: > List help: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Mon Apr 15 04:10:45 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (sivasubramanian muthusamy (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 13:40:45 +0530 Subject: [governance] Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy positions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Arsene, Yes. The proposal as submitted is as below, to be edited and amended where necessary. ( The confirmed initial list also includes Jeremy, as stated in the proposal, a more elaborate list to be drawn up): The proposal data submitted is as follows: ==*1. Proposer (Contact Person)*== Gender: Male Family Name: Muthusamy Given Name: Sivasubramanian Nationality: India E-mail: 6.Internet at gmail.com Stakeholder Group: Civil Society Regional Group: Asia-Pacific Group Organization: Internet Society India Chennai Country where Organization is based: India ==*2. Theme*== Theme: Digital Inclusion 3. Issues: distributed and decentralized multi-stakeholder approach *4. Workshop Session Title*: Is the Civil Society doing enough as a Stakeholder group? *5. Policy Question(s)*: Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy positions? *6. Relevance to Theme*: Though proposed under "Digital Inclusion", it is a workshop on stakeholder 'balance', proposed across the three themes, and of relevance to the overall design of the multi-stakeholder model of Internet Governance. *7. Relevance to Internet Governance*: When broadly classified, Civil Society is one of the three stakeholders in Internet Governance. Since WSIS 2005, Civil Society has played a constructive role to bring about a balance in Internet Governance debates. However, a certain degree of imbalance persists as the other stakeholder groups tend to steer policy a little more than proportionately towards their own respective positions. Governments around the world draft legislative directives some of which the Civil Society find undesirable. In some instances, Civil Society positions remarkably differed from that of Government, the proposed Acts such as SOPA or PIPA or Directives were withdrawn, only to be reintroduced and confirmed by some other title or form. Business responds to Civil Society positions, for instance, on Privacy issues, but many of the concerns of Civil Society are not adequately addressed. It could be stated that the other stakeholder groups prevail more than proportionately over Civil Society, in matters related to Internet Governance. This prompts the question, "Is the Civil Society participating enough? Is the Civil Society doing enough?" If not enough, what needs to be done? In Internet Governance, the formal title as "Civil Society" is shared by a somewhat loose collaboration between Internet Governance participants who took up the Civil Society role since WSIS 2005, other early CS participants in the IGF, organizations that pursue issues in public interest including Privacy organizations, Freedom foundations etc, and also organizations such as some of the Internet Society Chapters, some of the ICANN AtLarge Structures, some of the participants from ICANN Non Commercial Stakeholder Group etc, who partake in Civil Society positions in their own way, though not always entirely identifying themselves as Civil Society. If the Civil society is not doing enough, is it because it requires greater interaction among those who pursue Civil Society positions in the IGF? How would Civil Society strengthen itself? Would it also look for Civil Society participation from beyond the IGF arena to bring in newer Civil Society participants to the IGF? These are some, and not all, questions that follow the questions in the title. ==*8. Workshop Session Format*== Session Format: Round Table - Circle - 90 Min ==*9. Diversity*== First Time in IGF: No Times Before: 6 ==Previous Report== Name: Organized the meetings of the Dynamic Coalition on Core-Internet Values, and also independently organized 6 or more workshops. Report Link: https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/index.php?q=filedepot_download/4398/555 b. Are you and/or your co-organizers coming from a *developing country [1]* or under-represented region? Developing Countries: Yes ==Diversity Options== Gender Diversity: Yes Geography Diversity: Yes Stakeholder Group Diversity: Yes Policy Perspective Diversity: Yes Accessibility Diversity: No Youth Diversity: Yes Local Diversity: Yes Diversity Information: The workshop is proposed with a list of three initial panelists, but further work to be done to invite participation from lead-IGF Civil Society participant organizations including Internet Governance Caucus, Best Bits, Association for Progressive Communication, and also invite other organizations that pursue Civil Society positions at the IGF and in related forums, and to invite participation from Business and Government, all of the above with a certain degree of geographical balance and gender balance. *10. Workshop Session Description*: The session would revolve around the Title Questions, "Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy positions?" to bring up supplementary questions, and in the process identify its strengths and weaknesses to identify solutions towards strengthening itself for a balance. *11. Workshop Session Expected Outcomes*: The session is aimed to articulate shared concerns and common pursuits and perhaps lead to well defined efforts to strengthen the Civil Society for the good of all stakeholders who would equally desire a certain degree of balance in Internet Governance. ==*12. Organizers Information*== Email addresses of organizers (comma separated): 6.Internet at gmail.com ==*13. Speakers*== Email addresses of provisionally confirmed speakers (comma separated): 6.Internet at gmail.com,sebastien at bachollet.fr,judith at jhellerstein.com Speakers Availability: Have reached out to the Civil Society lists and user organizations, some more work to be done to call for panelists with a good understanding of the history of Civil Society in Internet Governance, the panelist list is be expanded with attention to the various requirements of balance. ==*14. Moderators*== Online Moderator: sebastien at bachollet.fr Onsite Moderator: 6.Internet at gmail.com *15. Rapporteur*: 6.Internet at gmail.com ==*16. Session Interaction and Participation*== Discussion Facilitation: Following opening remarks and perspectives from the lead panelists, the discussion would be around the table, encouraging diversity of view points and a free flowing debate with Q at A around the table, both questions and responses by all participants around the table. Online Tools: Yes Online Participation: I will request one of the Internet Society Chapters to help manage remote participation using the IGF platform. Other Tools: Yes Social Tools: Skype, Zoom, Livestream. On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 9:49 AM Arsène Tungali wrote: > Hi Siva, > > Were you finally able to submit this proposal? I note this came in very > last minute, i was on a flight so could not comment nor support it’s > submission. > > If it goes to the next stage, then we will have time to reshape it. > > Good luck, > Arsene > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 14 Apr 2019, at 22:22, sivasubramanian muthusamy (via governance > Mailing List) wrote: > > Hello, > > > With a few hours remaining for submission of the 2019 workshops, I intend > to propose a workshop. Looking for support from IGC, Besbits and APC, some > quick suggestions to improve the text, and more importantly, for > suggestions of speakers who have a good understanding of the history of > Civil Society in IG. > > Kindly respond ASAP. > > title > "Is the Civil Society doing enough?" > policy question > "Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet > Governance Policy positions?" > relevance to the theme: > Though proposed under "Digital Inclusion", it is a workshop across the > three themes, and of relevance to the overall design of the > multi-stakeholder model of Internet Governance. > relevance to Internet Governance: > When broadly classified, Civil Society is one of the three stakeholders in > Internet Governance. Since WSIS 2005, Civil Society has played a > constructive role to bring about a balance in Internet Governance debates. > However, a certain degree of imbalance persists as the other stakeholder > groups tend to steer policy a little more than proportionately towards > their own respective positions. Governments around the world draft > legislative directives some of which the Civil Society find undesirable. In > some instances, Civil Society positions remarkably differed from that of > Government, the proposed Acts such as SOPA or PIPA or Directives were > withdrawn, only to be reintroduced and confirmed by some other title or > form. Business responds to Civil Society positions, for instance, on > Privacy issues, but many of the concerns of Civil Society are not > adequately addressed. It could be stated that the other stakeholder groups > prevail more than proportionately over Civil Society, in matters related to > Internet Governance. This prompts the question, "Is the Civil Society > participating enough? Is the Civil Society doing enough?" > > If not enough, what needs to be done? In Internet Governance, the formal > title as "Civil Society" is shared by a somewhat loose collaboration > between Internet Governance participants who took up the Civil Society role > since WSIS 2005, other early CS participants in the IGF, organizations that > pursue issues in public interest including Privacy organizations, Freedom > foundations etc, and also organizations such as some Internet Society > Chapters, ICANN AtLarge, ICANN Non Commercial Stakeholder Group etc, who > partake in Civil Society positions in their own way. > > If the Civil society is not doing enough, is it because it requires > greater interaction among those who pursue Civil Society positions in the > IGF? How would Civil Society strengthen itself? Would it also look for > Civil Society participation from beyond the IGF arena to bring in newer > Civil Society participants to the IGF? > > These are some, and not all, questions that follow the questions in the > title. > > Workshop session description: > The session would revolve around the Title Questions, "Is the Civil > Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy > positions?" to bring up supplementary questions, and in the process > identify its strengths and weaknesses to identify solutions towards > strengthening itself for a balance. > > > Sivasubramanian M > twitter.com/shivaindia > > --- > To unsubscribe: > > List help: > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Mon Apr 15 00:30:16 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Deirdre Williams (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 00:30:16 -0400 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy positions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Siva, I think this is an excellent idea, but it seems to me that it is also a topic for a discussion that can go on now, without waiting for the IGF. In fact an effective discussion between now and November could culminate in a really effective workshop? One thing among many others that presents a need for clarification is an understanding of who/what IS the civil society that should be considering these issues. Experience suggests that the more voices that can be harnessed together with a common understanding of a common goal the more likely it is that that goal will be achieved BUT "a common understanding of a common goal" is not an easy thing to find. Good luck and best wishes Deirdre On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 at 15:22, sivasubramanian muthusamy < 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > > With a few hours remaining for submission of the 2019 workshops, I intend > to propose a workshop. Looking for support from IGC, Besbits and APC, some > quick suggestions to improve the text, and more importantly, for > suggestions of speakers who have a good understanding of the history of > Civil Society in IG. > > Kindly respond ASAP. > > title > "Is the Civil Society doing enough?" > policy question > "Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet > Governance Policy positions?" > relevance to the theme: > Though proposed under "Digital Inclusion", it is a workshop across the > three themes, and of relevance to the overall design of the > multi-stakeholder model of Internet Governance. > relevance to Internet Governance: > When broadly classified, Civil Society is one of the three stakeholders in > Internet Governance. Since WSIS 2005, Civil Society has played a > constructive role to bring about a balance in Internet Governance debates. > However, a certain degree of imbalance persists as the other stakeholder > groups tend to steer policy a little more than proportionately towards > their own respective positions. Governments around the world draft > legislative directives some of which the Civil Society find undesirable. In > some instances, Civil Society positions remarkably differed from that of > Government, the proposed Acts such as SOPA or PIPA or Directives were > withdrawn, only to be reintroduced and confirmed by some other title or > form. Business responds to Civil Society positions, for instance, on > Privacy issues, but many of the concerns of Civil Society are not > adequately addressed. It could be stated that the other stakeholder groups > prevail more than proportionately over Civil Society, in matters related to > Internet Governance. This prompts the question, "Is the Civil Society > participating enough? Is the Civil Society doing enough?" > > If not enough, what needs to be done? In Internet Governance, the formal > title as "Civil Society" is shared by a somewhat loose collaboration > between Internet Governance participants who took up the Civil Society role > since WSIS 2005, other early CS participants in the IGF, organizations that > pursue issues in public interest including Privacy organizations, Freedom > foundations etc, and also organizations such as some Internet Society > Chapters, ICANN AtLarge, ICANN Non Commercial Stakeholder Group etc, who > partake in Civil Society positions in their own way. > > If the Civil society is not doing enough, is it because it requires > greater interaction among those who pursue Civil Society positions in the > IGF? How would Civil Society strengthen itself? Would it also look for > Civil Society participation from beyond the IGF arena to bring in newer > Civil Society participants to the IGF? > > These are some, and not all, questions that follow the questions in the > title. > > Workshop session description: > The session would revolve around the Title Questions, "Is the Civil > Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy > positions?" to bring up supplementary questions, and in the process > identify its strengths and weaknesses to identify solutions towards > strengthening itself for a balance. > > > Sivasubramanian M > twitter.com/shivaindia > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joly at punkcast.com Mon Apr 15 10:17:31 2019 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 10:17:31 -0400 Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?WEBCAST_TODAY=3A_Data_Privacy_=E2=80=93_Ch?= =?UTF-8?Q?allenges=2C_Opportunities_and_the_Prospects_for_Legislation_in_?= =?UTF-8?Q?the_U=2ES=2E?= Message-ID: Almost a year in the planning, inspired by the introduction of the GDPR last May, this is today [image: live] Today, *Monday April 15 2019*, the *Internet Society Washington DC Chapter * and the *Internet Governance Lab * present a full day conference - *Data Privacy - Challenges, Opportunities and the Prospects for Legislation in the U.S. at American University *. Key stakeholders discussing challenges and opportunities around data privacy, including the risks and harms associated with consumer data collection, the possibility of a data privacy framework in the US, and the intersection of data privacy and Internet governance. The event will be webcast live on the* Internet Society Livestream Channel *. *Agenda: https://isoc-dc.org/data-privacy-challenges-opportunities-prospects-legislation-u-s/ * *Twitter: #dataprivacy * *Permalink* https://isoc.live/11039/ - -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast -------------------------------------------------------------- - -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Mon Apr 15 11:50:25 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (sivasubramanian muthusamy (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 21:20:25 +0530 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy positions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Deirdre On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 5:51 PM Deirdre Williams wrote: > Dear Siva, > I think this is an excellent idea, but it seems to me that it is also a > topic for a discussion that can go on now, without waiting for the IGF. In > fact an effective discussion between now and November could culminate in a > really effective workshop? > Yes, we don't have to wait for the IGF, we could discuss this on the list. > One thing among many others that presents a need for clarification is an > understanding of who/what IS the civil society that should be considering > these issues. > Experience suggests that the more voices that can be harnessed together > with a common understanding of a common goal the more likely it is that > that goal will be achieved BUT "a common understanding of a common goal" is > not an easy thing to find. > The achievable goal is "reduced differences, a broad agreement, shared pursuits in a common direction". We don't have to dwell too much on the task or defining what is Civil Society, we already understand what is Civil Society, roughly, but could examine a few questions for clarity, without getting trapped in the exercise: the discussions may not have to resemble an exercise to arrive at a legal definition. The Internet Governance Civil Society, by rough understanding, is a class of participants who are NOT part of the Government stakeholder group, NOT part of the Business stakeholder group, if we go by a broad categorization of All Stakeholders into three major groups. But we have at least three other, more distinct, major stakeholders in Internet Governance: Internet Technical Community, International Organizations and the Academic Community. (An Official MAG chart at page breaks down stakeholder groups as Governments, Private Sector, Civil Society, Technical Community and Media) We could perhaps start with prevailing positions of the Academic Community and seek views about the extend of the Academic Community's broad inclinations towards one of the three stakeholder groups or another. Some International Organizations are identified with Governments, some are not. I haven't watched debates on stakeholder classification, but the more experienced Civil Society leaders with a good understanding of the History of Internet Governance may have views to share on Stakeholder classes. This is *NOT* to suggest that we are to debate on the class of stakeholder group International Organizations and the Academic Community belong to. That would far exceed the scope of the role of Civil Society. The various stakeholder classes are mentioned here with a view to find an answer to the question, "Are some of the International Organizations and a part or all of the Academic Community presently included or identified as part of Civil Society? Sivasubramanian M > Good luck and best wishes > Deirdre > > On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 at 15:22, sivasubramanian muthusamy < > 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> >> With a few hours remaining for submission of the 2019 workshops, I intend >> to propose a workshop. Looking for support from IGC, Besbits and APC, some >> quick suggestions to improve the text, and more importantly, for >> suggestions of speakers who have a good understanding of the history of >> Civil Society in IG. >> >> Kindly respond ASAP. >> >> title >> "Is the Civil Society doing enough?" >> policy question >> "Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet >> Governance Policy positions?" >> relevance to the theme: >> Though proposed under "Digital Inclusion", it is a workshop across the >> three themes, and of relevance to the overall design of the >> multi-stakeholder model of Internet Governance. >> relevance to Internet Governance: >> When broadly classified, Civil Society is one of the three stakeholders >> in Internet Governance. Since WSIS 2005, Civil Society has played a >> constructive role to bring about a balance in Internet Governance debates. >> However, a certain degree of imbalance persists as the other stakeholder >> groups tend to steer policy a little more than proportionately towards >> their own respective positions. Governments around the world draft >> legislative directives some of which the Civil Society find undesirable. In >> some instances, Civil Society positions remarkably differed from that of >> Government, the proposed Acts such as SOPA or PIPA or Directives were >> withdrawn, only to be reintroduced and confirmed by some other title or >> form. Business responds to Civil Society positions, for instance, on >> Privacy issues, but many of the concerns of Civil Society are not >> adequately addressed. It could be stated that the other stakeholder groups >> prevail more than proportionately over Civil Society, in matters related to >> Internet Governance. This prompts the question, "Is the Civil Society >> participating enough? Is the Civil Society doing enough?" >> >> If not enough, what needs to be done? In Internet Governance, the formal >> title as "Civil Society" is shared by a somewhat loose collaboration >> between Internet Governance participants who took up the Civil Society role >> since WSIS 2005, other early CS participants in the IGF, organizations that >> pursue issues in public interest including Privacy organizations, Freedom >> foundations etc, and also organizations such as some Internet Society >> Chapters, ICANN AtLarge, ICANN Non Commercial Stakeholder Group etc, who >> partake in Civil Society positions in their own way. >> >> If the Civil society is not doing enough, is it because it requires >> greater interaction among those who pursue Civil Society positions in the >> IGF? How would Civil Society strengthen itself? Would it also look for >> Civil Society participation from beyond the IGF arena to bring in newer >> Civil Society participants to the IGF? >> >> These are some, and not all, questions that follow the questions in the >> title. >> >> Workshop session description: >> The session would revolve around the Title Questions, "Is the Civil >> Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy >> positions?" to bring up supplementary questions, and in the process >> identify its strengths and weaknesses to identify solutions towards >> strengthening itself for a balance. >> >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> twitter.com/shivaindia >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Tue Apr 16 09:59:36 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (sivasubramanian muthusamy (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:29:36 +0530 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] A Day0 proposal, tentatively submitted as individual by submission deadline. In-Reply-To: References: <16a1e5879e0.2824.705b097764579b2584e3d1b2b46a90a4@theiofoundation.org> <16a1e7de7e8.2824.705b097764579b2584e3d1b2b46a90a4@theiofoundation.org> Message-ID: Dear Sheetal, It was almost midnight, a minute or two before the deadline, when I wrote as an individual (without having time to bring it up at Bestbits or IGC) and proposed a Civil Society Day0 event, which is the same as the event you have proposed, except that instead of a meeting of 30 participants, it says 300 participants, makes an overture for funding / funding assistance from the IGF. There are some suggestions on this list that we could work on the proposal(s) in a shared document. I have opened a Google Document, and for a start, copied and pasted both proposals and sharing it with both the lists, I hope this is alright. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QQQNFq7C6WhsAQlCxxAlr8X7QR07sBphudabE-LqRGI/edit?usp=sharing As someone suggested, it is good to have more than one proposal with the IGF for better chances of approval for at least one of the event. In the meantime, among the CS participants, some work could be done on the document to expand the proposal, to discuss the event theme, size of participation, and to draw up an outreach and other efforts required Will also sharing the workshop proposal on the CS theme on the relevant thread. Thank you. Sivasubramanian M twitter.com/shivaindia On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 12:46 AM Sheetal Kumar wrote: > Dear all, > > I'm just writing to confirm here that I did submit a proposal for a day > zero event. It was a bit last minute after Jean reminded us of the deadline > so apologies that we didn't get to discuss it more. I've copied it below > the dotted line. Of course we can always arrange a meeting if the proposal > doesn't get accepted and crowdsourcing the agenda sounds like a good plan! > Does anyone know when we should expect to hear back? > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Dear IGF 2019 'Day 0' Event Proposer, > > Thank you for your submission. It is well received with the following > values: > > Name Contact Person: Sheetal Kumar > Name of Requesting Organization: Global Partners Digital > Title of the Event: Civil society coordination meeting > Short Description of the Event: > The civil society coordination event will act as a convening and > collaboration opportunity for civil society groups working on issues > related > to internet governance and policy. It will allow groups to discuss issues > of > common concern and to identify opportunities for collaboration on issues > and > forums. It will also allow the participants to consider issues relevant to > the IGF agenda and identify what opportunities exist during the IGF where > civil society can come together to reinforce common positions and thereby > strengthen the civil society voice in internet governance discussions. > > Estimated Number of Participants Expected to Attend: 30 > Requested Duration for the Event (*Cannot be guaranteed): 5 hours > Additional Comments: > > If possible, we would like to ensure internet connectivity for remote > participation and request a room with electrical plugs. > > > After the deadline, the IGF Secretariat will inform proposers on the status > of their requests. > Please note requests will be accepted on a first-come, first-serve basis, > and > not all event durations may be accommodated. > > For specific questions, please contact Ms. Eleonora Mazzucchi at: > eleonora.mazzucchi at un.org > > Best regards, > > IGF Secretariat > > > On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 at 09:33, Jean F. Quéralt < > JFQueralt at theiofoundation.org> wrote: > >> Dear Siva, >> >> My comment comes from a very simple reality: I am new in the space and my >> connections and options to involve other organizations is mostly in those >> two countries. I may be able to facilitate to increase their presence while >> I doubt I can do much for other regions at the moment. >> >> By all means, I would hope that other people do the same in the areas >> where they can have some positive participation outcomes. I do not have the >> proper contacts with EFF, Mozilla and other relevant stakeholders. I wish I >> did. I am talking with many other organizations in the past weeks to >> encourage them to join the conversation and to attempt some level of >> organization. >> >> As for Germany, yes we should and I have started doing my own list based >> on our contacts. >> >> I was just wondering about where could we be putting all this info >> (agenda, who are the orgs we are approaching, etc) in a centralized place >> (an etherpad or G Docs). >> That could be a way to coordinate that. We identify organizations and ask >> for people to pick up those they have contact with or refer us so that we >> can manage the engagement. >> (This point -the information- leads back to something I've been proposing >> around: we need a global CRM for CS - More on this as we move on) >> >> Best, >> Jean >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 4:03 PM Sivasubramanian M <6.Internet at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Dear Jean, Sheetal, >>> >>> Taking your idea of inviting CS organizations from Malaysia and >>> Philippines (what are their names?) further, why not also work on inviting >>> some of the constructive CS organizations from within the host country with >>> help from the host, also from France? Why not seek participation from >>> Mozilla, EFF and other organizations that pay attention to global issues? >>> What are the global CS organizations who could bring significant value to >>> the IGF? >>> >>> Sivasubramanian M >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 6:25 AM Jean F. Quéralt < >>> jfqueralt at theiofoundation.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Great. Thx a lot for the initiative :-) >>>> >>>> I'm thinking of ways to bring some orgs from Malaysia and Philippines. >>>> Been discussing options with my colleagues. I'll contact some potential >>>> funders to assist them if our petitions get approved to seek for more >>>> participation of CS in such events. >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> Jean >>>> >>>> >>>> On April 15, 2019 08:25:42 Sivasubramanian M <6.Internet at gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear Jean, >>>>> >>>>> Wasn't aware of Sheetal's proposal, and couldn't wait to verify if >>>>> there has been a submission already. It occurred to me to write a proposal >>>>> as late as minutes to the deadline. As you suggest, more than one proposal >>>>> increases the chances of a slot for a Day0 event. >>>>> >>>>> Day0 proposal does not require speakers to be identified. So I have >>>>> not mentioned any names as speakers. We could add names if the discussion >>>>> progresses. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 5:44 AM Jean F. Quéralt < >>>>> jfqueralt at theiofoundation.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hello, Siva. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sheetal did submit a request yesterday for a similar initiative >>>>>> although in another format (different assistance expectation, etc). >>>>>> I'd argue that the more petitions we submit the more chances we have >>>>>> to get it accepted. Maybe the selection process will merge both. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent it asap before the deadline. If need be, you can use me as >>>>>> "dummy" for the list of speakers and then we figure out who to actually >>>>>> onboard if it gets shortlisted. >>>>>> (I'm not the right person to be in the final list) >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers. >>>>>> Jean >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On April 15, 2019 07:58:10 sivasubramanian muthusamy < >>>>>> 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sharing a Day0 proposal, tentatively submitted as individual, to be >>>>>>> amended/expanded if useful, and to be owned and organized by the Civil >>>>>>> Society, if there is support to the idea of a Day 0 CS event, if not >>>>>>> proposed already. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Title of the Event: Civil Society Reunion >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Short Description of the Event: Proposed as an event to be passed on >>>>>>> to be >>>>>>> 'owned' by a small group of lead-participants from Civil Society, to >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> identified. This is a preliminary request, subject to reaffirmation >>>>>>> by a team >>>>>>> of organizers to be formed, as a event that would a reunion of Civil >>>>>>> Society >>>>>>> participants, mostly from within the IGF space, some to be invited >>>>>>> from Civil >>>>>>> Society without. Proposal to be expanded, and if approved as an >>>>>>> expanded >>>>>>> proposal, to be organized with a request to the IGF for a meeting >>>>>>> space with >>>>>>> good conferencing facilities, preferably in the IGF venue, with >>>>>>> Internet for >>>>>>> remote participation, Coffee and lunch or boxed lunch for 300-500 >>>>>>> participants, either as direct/in-kind funding from the IGF, or by >>>>>>> way of the >>>>>>> IGF's assistance in securing the required funding, which may be >>>>>>> around >>>>>>> $10,000 euros. The event would be organized, tentatively, as a Round >>>>>>> Table >>>>>>> discussion on the topic "Stakeholder balance in Internet Governance >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> innovation in Business and effectiveness in Governance” Discussion >>>>>>> to be >>>>>>> led by discussion leaders from across stakeholder groups, with a >>>>>>> geographical >>>>>>> and gender balance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Estimated Number of Participants Expected to Attend: 300 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Requested Duration for the Event (*Cannot be guaranteed): 5 hours. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>>>>> >>>>>>> twitter.com/shivaindia >>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>> >>>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> > > -- > > > *Sheetal Kumar* > Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL > T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | > PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 > DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Tue Apr 16 10:03:47 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (sivasubramanian muthusamy (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:33:47 +0530 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy positions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Shared the proposal as an editable document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1txgk8QaM0wKFqIjTXxO-KKSI-g2xMvHLLDZ_aJjgY2Y/edit?usp=sharing On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 9:20 PM sivasubramanian muthusamy < 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Deirdre > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 5:51 PM Deirdre Williams > wrote: > >> Dear Siva, >> I think this is an excellent idea, but it seems to me that it is also a >> topic for a discussion that can go on now, without waiting for the IGF. In >> fact an effective discussion between now and November could culminate in a >> really effective workshop? >> > > Yes, we don't have to wait for the IGF, we could discuss this on the list. > > >> One thing among many others that presents a need for clarification is an >> understanding of who/what IS the civil society that should be considering >> these issues. >> Experience suggests that the more voices that can be harnessed together >> with a common understanding of a common goal the more likely it is that >> that goal will be achieved BUT "a common understanding of a common goal" is >> not an easy thing to find. >> > > The achievable goal is "reduced differences, a broad agreement, shared > pursuits in a common direction". We don't have to dwell too much on the > task or defining what is Civil Society, we already understand what is Civil > Society, roughly, but could examine a few questions for clarity, without > getting trapped in the exercise: the discussions may not have to resemble > an exercise to arrive at a legal definition. > > The Internet Governance Civil Society, by rough understanding, is a class > of participants who are NOT part of the Government stakeholder group, NOT > part of the Business stakeholder group, if we go by a broad categorization > of All Stakeholders into three major groups. But we have at least three > other, more distinct, major stakeholders in Internet Governance: Internet > Technical Community, International Organizations and the Academic > Community. (An Official MAG chart at page breaks down stakeholder groups > as Governments, Private Sector, Civil Society, Technical Community and > Media) We could perhaps start with prevailing positions of the Academic > Community and seek views about the extend of the Academic Community's broad > inclinations towards one of the three stakeholder groups or another. Some > International Organizations are identified with Governments, some are not. > I haven't watched debates on stakeholder classification, but the more > experienced Civil Society leaders with a good understanding of the History > of Internet Governance may have views to share on Stakeholder classes. > > This is *NOT* to suggest that we are to debate on the class of > stakeholder group International Organizations and the Academic Community > belong to. That would far exceed the scope of the role of Civil Society. > The various stakeholder classes are mentioned here with a view to find an > answer to the question, "Are some of the International Organizations and a > part or all of the Academic Community presently included or identified as > part of Civil Society? > > Sivasubramanian M > > >> Good luck and best wishes >> Deirdre >> >> On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 at 15:22, sivasubramanian muthusamy < >> 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> With a few hours remaining for submission of the 2019 workshops, I >>> intend to propose a workshop. Looking for support from IGC, Besbits and >>> APC, some quick suggestions to improve the text, and more importantly, for >>> suggestions of speakers who have a good understanding of the history of >>> Civil Society in IG. >>> >>> Kindly respond ASAP. >>> >>> title >>> "Is the Civil Society doing enough?" >>> policy question >>> "Is the Civil Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet >>> Governance Policy positions?" >>> relevance to the theme: >>> Though proposed under "Digital Inclusion", it is a workshop across the >>> three themes, and of relevance to the overall design of the >>> multi-stakeholder model of Internet Governance. >>> relevance to Internet Governance: >>> When broadly classified, Civil Society is one of the three stakeholders >>> in Internet Governance. Since WSIS 2005, Civil Society has played a >>> constructive role to bring about a balance in Internet Governance debates. >>> However, a certain degree of imbalance persists as the other stakeholder >>> groups tend to steer policy a little more than proportionately towards >>> their own respective positions. Governments around the world draft >>> legislative directives some of which the Civil Society find undesirable. In >>> some instances, Civil Society positions remarkably differed from that of >>> Government, the proposed Acts such as SOPA or PIPA or Directives were >>> withdrawn, only to be reintroduced and confirmed by some other title or >>> form. Business responds to Civil Society positions, for instance, on >>> Privacy issues, but many of the concerns of Civil Society are not >>> adequately addressed. It could be stated that the other stakeholder groups >>> prevail more than proportionately over Civil Society, in matters related to >>> Internet Governance. This prompts the question, "Is the Civil Society >>> participating enough? Is the Civil Society doing enough?" >>> >>> If not enough, what needs to be done? In Internet Governance, the formal >>> title as "Civil Society" is shared by a somewhat loose collaboration >>> between Internet Governance participants who took up the Civil Society role >>> since WSIS 2005, other early CS participants in the IGF, organizations that >>> pursue issues in public interest including Privacy organizations, Freedom >>> foundations etc, and also organizations such as some Internet Society >>> Chapters, ICANN AtLarge, ICANN Non Commercial Stakeholder Group etc, who >>> partake in Civil Society positions in their own way. >>> >>> If the Civil society is not doing enough, is it because it requires >>> greater interaction among those who pursue Civil Society positions in the >>> IGF? How would Civil Society strengthen itself? Would it also look for >>> Civil Society participation from beyond the IGF arena to bring in newer >>> Civil Society participants to the IGF? >>> >>> These are some, and not all, questions that follow the questions in the >>> title. >>> >>> Workshop session description: >>> The session would revolve around the Title Questions, "Is the Civil >>> Society doing enough to bring about a balance in Internet Governance Policy >>> positions?" to bring up supplementary questions, and in the process >>> identify its strengths and weaknesses to identify solutions towards >>> strengthening itself for a balance. >>> >>> >>> Sivasubramanian M >>> twitter.com/shivaindia >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> >> -- >> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William >> Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Thu Apr 18 13:09:37 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Ars=C3=A8ne?= Tungali (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:09:37 +0200 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [apc.members] Call for travel support for the IGF 2019 References: <3c706b1b-c86a-ebbe-6373-cfd8b9c463bb@apc.org> Message-ID: Fyi! Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: Valeria Betancourt > Date: 18 April 2019 at 02:43:14 CAT > To: APC Members > Subject: [apc.members] Call for travel support for the IGF 2019 > Reply-To: APC Members > > Dear members, > > We want to share information about an opportunity to apply for funding > support to attend the IGF 2019 in Germany. Below are some details that > we have extracted from the call. Please note that the call for > applications will be open from 9 April to 30 June 2019. > https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/supporting-participation-at-the-igf-2019-annual-meeting > > Best, > > Valeria > > > ============== > > Supporting participation at the IGF 2019 annual meeting > > Call for Travel Support to attend the 14th annual meeting of the IGF > > The mandate of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) calls for > strengthening and enhancing of the stakeholder engagement from > developing ‎countries. It also calls for the Forum to contribute to > building capacity for Internet governance in ‎developing countries, > drawing fully on local sources of knowledge and expertise‎. > > During the 13th IGF, the United Nations Secretary-General has called for > action to increase inclusiveness in the IGF processes. The > Secretary-General underlined that the IGF must increase its efforts to > draw upon the “weak and missing voices” into the IGFs work. It was also > called for a broader multidisciplinary approach, to involve experts not > traditionally involved in the IGF processes. The community also echoed > for more inclusion and diversity in the IGF's participation spectrum. > > For these reasons, the IGF 2019 Host Country, Government of Germany, > will support eligible candidates from developing countries to > participate at the 14th annual meeting of the IGF from 25 - 29 November > in Berlin, German. It will also support the participation of the MAG > members at the MAG meetings and the IGF annual meeting. > > The Call for applications will be open from 9 April to 30 June 2019. > > ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA > > The Call will support individual stakeholders that: ‎ > > represent any stakeholder group. > are from a Least Developed Country, Landlocked Developing Country, > Small Island ‎Developing State or a Transitional Economy.‎ > demonstrate interest in Internet governance-related activities. > show a demonstrated commitment to contribute to its community after > participating at the IGF 2019. > > Preference will be given to candidates from underrepresented groups, > such as: ‎women, indigenous people, persons with disabilities, older > persons, youth. > > Those requesting partial funding will have preference over others, > should all ‎criteria be met.‎ > > Candidates engaged in programme sessions (e.g. co-organisers, speakers, > moderators) will be evaluated on a priority and case-by-case basis. > > SELECTION PROCESS > > The IGF Secretariat will also collaborate with the national and regional > IGF initiatives for conducting a bottom-up process to identify eligible > candidates that could contribute to their local communities and the IGF > 2019 process with their expertise. > > The Call for Travel Support will be announced on the IGF website. > The network of national, regional and youth IGF initiatives (NRIs) > will distribute the Call to their respective communities. The > multistakeholder organizing committees of the NRIs will invite the > applicant to submit their expression of interests through submitting an > online form within the deadline. > The NRIs multistakeholder organizing committees will evaluate > received applications in accordance with above-referenced criteria. > The NRIs Organizing Committees will develop a list of all evaluated > candidates in order of a priority with appropriate justifications and > submit to the IGF Secretariat for further evaluation. > Candidates coming from Governmental stakeholder group will be > evaluated only by the IGF Secretariat/UNDESA. > The IGF Secretariat/UNDESA will review received list from the NRIs > and make the final decision on granting support, respecting agreed > principles. The IGF Secretariat may consult the NRIs Organizing > Committee for advice and will communicate final selection. > Before the list is published, it will be communicated to the Host > Country for a review. > The number of selected candidates would be dependent on the funds > available. > The final compositions of participants will be stakeholder, > regionally and gender balanced. > The IGF Secretariat can approach underrepresented stakeholders that > can enrich diversity of the meeting, with an offer to support their > participation at the IGF 2019. > > > PROCESS TIMELINE > > Open Call for Applications: 9 April 2019 > Close Call for Applications: 30 June 2019 > Evaluation: 15 July 2019 > Announcement of successful applicants: 31 July 2019 > > APPLICATION FORM > > All interested candidates are invited to express their interest through > a FORM on the IGF website from 9 April to 30 June 2019. > > > -- > Valeria Betancourt > Directora / Manager > Programa de Políticas de Information y Comunicación / Communication and > Information Policy Programme > Asociación para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones / Association for > Progressive Communications, APC > http://www.apc.org > > > _______________________________________________ > You are receiving this email because you are subscribed to APC.members mailing list > Additional information and options can be found at https://lists.apc.org/mailman/listinfo/apc.members > If you want to unsubscribe, send an email to apc.members-unsubscribe at lists.apc.org > If you want more information about how we protect your privacy, please refer to our privacy policy(https://www.apc.org/en/privacy-policy) or write to privacy at apc.org. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Policy guiding membership in this list: All new list members *must* be introduced. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Membership on the list: All member representatives to APC Council, individual members, and APC staff are subscribed to this list. Some other staff of APC member organisations is subscribed. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > All conversations that take place on this list are considered confidential. As a member of the APC network, you are expected to respect this confidentiality. If you wish to circulate or quote a post from the APC.members list in any other space or forum, you MUST receive permission from the person who made the quote first on the APC.members listserv. > ------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Fri Apr 19 04:16:08 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (parminder (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 13:46:08 +0530 Subject: [governance] Save the Date: Day '0' at RightsCon- 11 June 2019 -- Workshop on a "digital justice manifesto" Message-ID: <3fa97c29-13a8-99db-1410-e28566214f8e@itforchange.net> Dear All *Join us this year at the RightsCon and be part of shaping **what **equity and social justice means in a digital world.* * * Just Net Coalition will be hosting a workshop "What social movements need to do in the age of data? Towards a digital justice manifesto" atDay '0' of the RightsCon Summit at Tunis this year on *11 June 2019 from 9:30-12:00 PM.*  This event is planned as a follow up of our recently concluded three day Workshop on Global Digital Justice in Bangkok in March 2019. We plan to take forward one of the critical agendas that came out of the Bangkok meeting - the need for a digital justice manifesto. Drawing from the building blocks that came out of the meeting, our workshop at Tunis will be aimed at further developing key categories and the framework of the Digital Justice Manifesto. In 2018, we successfully organized a satellite event ‘Contending with the digital frontier – What next for social movements?’ for Day ‘0’ of RightsCon in Toronto. The event aimed at brokering a dialogue between actors from social movements and members of the digital rights community and explore the possibility of creating common pathways for data and digital justice. This year we wish to workshop the digital justice manifesto and enrich it through the learnings from a structured inter-movement dialogue. If you are attending RightsCon this year, please do plan your travel to be able to join us for this workshop and what is sure to be an engaged and productivediscussion. Please also share widely with networks and colleagues who are considering RightsCon on their calendar this year. A more detailed program and agenda will follow shortly from our end. In the meantime, we are happy to answer any questions you may have. Best parminder -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Tue Apr 2 06:01:17 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Ars=C3=A8ne?= Tungali (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 12:01:17 +0200 Subject: [governance] IGF 2019 WS Proposal submission cycle Message-ID: Dear all, As we are getting closer to the deadline of the IGF 2019 workshop proposal submission, i wanted to draw your attention to this presentation (http://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/index.php?q=filedepot_download/3349/1541) by the IGF Secretariat during ICANN Kobe meeting. I am hoping the information in the document will help you better prepare your proposals. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to get in touch with me (as a current MAG member) and I will be able to channel them if I am unable to answer them. Best regards, Arsene ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Anja Gengo Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 08:53:38 +0000 Dear colleagues, As you know, the IGF Secretariat hosted a capacity building workshop during the ICANN64 meeting. The workshop focused on outreach and engagement toward all stakeholders with specific focus on the Asia Pacific region. The main reason for implementing this workshop was to increase the stakeholder engagement from the Asia Pacific region, given the low historic record. The workshop was held on 12 March from 17:00 - 18:30 hrs. It gathered between 50 and 55 participants. Among these, three MAG members attended. Participants were guided on the process of engagement at the IGF through a visual presentation: http://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/index.php?q=filedepot_download/3349/1541 We focused mainly on guiding the participants how to submit a workshop proposal for IGF 2019. From that workshop section, several questions/suggestions were raised. We would like to share a summary of key points raised, in case it will be of help to your work: * Participants noted that the workshop application system went through several complex changes compared to last year's process. It was advised to add an indication of newly added elements to the workshop submission form, as it is time consuming to get familiar to a new process before submitting. Some suggested to add a red label 'New' next to newly introduced sections. * Participants asked for clarification if the term 'first-time proposers' refers to individuals as co-organizers or organizations as co-organizers. It was advised to elaborate more clearly on this in the IGF 2019 Workshop Manual: https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/index.php?q=filedepot_download/7635/1530 * The limitation of the title to 60 characters should be expanded, as it limits proposers to create an attractive title. * Are all diversity criteria treated the same during the evaluation process? This is not clear from the IGF 2019 Workshop Form and Manual. * There should be a tag that reflects in a more straightforward manner the needs of people with disabilities. At your disposal should you have any questions/suggestions. Best regards, Anja From pimienta at funredes.org Mon Apr 22 16:11:11 2019 From: pimienta at funredes.org (Daniel Pimienta) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:11:11 -0400 Subject: [governance] Carole vs Goliath(s) In-Reply-To: <3fa97c29-13a8-99db-1410-e28566214f8e@itforchange.net> References: <3fa97c29-13a8-99db-1410-e28566214f8e@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Forwarded for its heavy relevance to governance matters (sorry for cross-posting). Carole is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carole_Cadwalladr >From: Doug Schuler >Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 11:16:01 -0700 >To: Ciresearchers >Subject: [ciresearchers] Carole vs. Goliath(s) > >I did take >the >reporting that we have been publishing in the >Observer >over the >past >two and a half years, I did condense it into a >15-minute talk, and I did deliver it on the TED >main stage directly to the people I described as >"the Gods of Silicon Valley: Mark Zuckerberg, >Sheryl Sandberg, Larry Page, Sergey Brin and >Jack Dorsey". The founders of Facebook and >Google " who were sponsoring the conference – >and the co-founder of Twitter –" who was speaking at it. > >I did tell them that they had facilitated >multiple crimes in the EU referendum. That as >things stood, I didn't think it was possible to >have free and fair elections ever again. That >liberal democracy was broken. And they had broke it. > >It was only later that I began to realise quite >what TED had done: how, in this setting, with >this crowd, it had committed the equivalent of >inviting the fox into the henhouse. And I was >the fox. Or as one attendee put it: "You came >into their temple," he said. "And shat on their altar." >from: >https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/apr/21/carole-cadwalladr-ted-tech-google-facebook-zuckerberg-silicon-valley > >https://www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_in_brexit_and_the_threat_to_democracy > >-- >Douglas Schuler >douglas at publicsphereproject.org >Twitter: @doug_schuler > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Public Sphere Project >    >http://www.publicsphereproject.org/ > >Mailing list ~ Collective Intelligence for the Common Good >    >http://scn9.scn.org/mailman/listinfo/ci4cg-announce >   >Creating the World Citizen Parliament >   >http://interactions.acm.org/archive/view/may-june-2013/creating-the-world-citizen-parliament >   >Liberating Voices!  A Pattern Language for >Communication Revolution (project) >    >http://www.publicsphereproject.org/patterns/lv > >Liberating Voices!  A Pattern Language for >Communication Revolution (book)     > >http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=11601 -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Mon Apr 29 14:45:39 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Bruna Martins dos Santos (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 15:45:39 -0300 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [bestbits] [Invitation]: Call on UNSG High Level Panel on digital cooperation draft report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all, Following Sheetal's email to the list about a call with the UNSG's High Level Panel on Digital Cooperation that will be hosted on *Thursday, 2 May, 13h00 utc*. If you wish to attend please write her an email informing about your interest, the requests will be processed on a first-come, first served basis. Best, bruna ---------- Forwarded message --------- De : Sheetal Kumar Date: lun. 29 avr. 2019 à 14:40 Subject: [bestbits] [Invitation]: Call on UNSG High Level Panel on digital cooperation draft report To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net> < Dear all, For anyone interested in commenting on the draft report of the UNSG's High Level Panel on Digital Cooperation, they have agreed to host a call with wider civil society on *02 May, Thursday 13:00 UTC*. On this call, they'll present three models for digital cooperation which form part of the report as well as the values and principles section of the report. If you're interested in attending, they've requested to do it on a first-come, first served basis so please reply to me on this thread if you want to join and I'll share the joining details. Unfortunately there isn't any material that can be shared from the report beforehand but there is some information here: https://dig.watch/sessions/road-testing-governance-models-secretary-general%E2%80%99s-high-level-panel-digital-cooperation Best Sheetal. -- *Sheetal Kumar* Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- *Bruna Martins dos Santos * Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos @boomartins -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Tue Apr 2 08:29:11 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Deirdre Williams (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 08:29:11 -0400 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: I agree with Siva and Remmy BUT who is going to bell the cat? (who will do the things suggested) Deirdre On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 03:13, sivasubramanian muthusamy <6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > Is there a comparitive list of best bit subscribers and IGC members? Who > is in bestbits while not being part of IGC? > > Also, what are there other related CS lists discussing IG issues, if not > comprehensively, issues such as Privacy, Security, Community Access? Why > not invite them to be a part of a larger IG Caucus, irrespective of whether > they physically and regularly participate in the global IGF? > > Is there a way of reaching out to NRIs to ask for the list of CS > participants in NRIs? > > Not merely consolidate, but also expand. A wider CS could bring in > creative solutions to the IG process and cause a balance. > > Sivasubramanian M > > Sivasubramanian M > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, 5:56 PM Deirdre Williams > wrote: > >> Dear Sivasubramanian, >> (Apologies for cross-posting) >> Although various people have pointed to the need for a common voice for >> civil society in this arena it really seems that there is no longer an >> appetite for the individual effort needed for a successful collaboration of >> this type. I would be very happy to have this opinion drowned by a chorus >> of voices proving me wrong, but I am not expecting to hear them. >> So I wonder if we should be looking for a new means to and a new process >> for collaboration? >> Should this be included in the agenda under 2 - Concrete ways forward? >> I don't have any real suggestions. I think that, more now than before, >> the process depends on individuals being willing to make a commitment of >> time energy and effort, and that this is happening in a context where the >> general ethos has lost its encouragement of sharing and communal energy. >> It needs to become possible again to perceive a common good. Should this >> happen by painstakingly linking very small local initiatives, where the >> "common good" is easy to see, rather than attempting things on a global >> scale (which in fact is "top down")? >> Hopefully the discussion on 9th will take us nearer to a solution. >> Best wishes >> Deirdre >> >> On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 at 16:41, Sivasubramanian M <6.Internet at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only about 8 >>> respondents. >>> >>> Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll >>> announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. >>> (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than >>> say "future of IG Civil Society". >>> >>> Sivasubramanian M >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >>>> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >>>> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >>>> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >>>> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >>>> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >>>> on the issues we work on. >>>> >>>> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >>>> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >>>> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >>>> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >>>> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >>>> forward. >>>> >>>> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be >>>> great if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and >>>> set up a room. >>>> >>>> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >>>> >>>> *Suggested agenda* >>>> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >>>> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >>>> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >>>> >>>> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Sheetal. >>>> >>>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have attached >>>>> the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included at the >>>>> top in case useful. >>>>> >>>>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half spent >>>>> discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 hour) and >>>>> the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other key >>>>> members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>>>> >>>>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way to >>>>> promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change the >>>>> current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way forward >>>>> which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible range of >>>>> opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, please do >>>>> chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up call. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks again. >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> Sheetal. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great to >>>>>> hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill out >>>>>> the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>> >>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>> >>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next >>>>>> steps next week. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to those >>>>>>> who have responded already. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, by >>>>>>> using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set of >>>>>>> discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a survey >>>>>>>> below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a call on >>>>>>>> February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it was >>>>>>>> agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>>>> calls. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to >>>>>>>> complete the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please >>>>>>>> complete the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any questions >>>>>>>> at all, don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For >>>>>>>>> those who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants >>>>>>>>> and notes here: >>>>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and IGC >>>>>>>>> have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, particularly >>>>>>>>> when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a survey to both >>>>>>>>> lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward which were >>>>>>>>> discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with the broader >>>>>>>>> communities feed into a decision on the future of the platforms. The survey >>>>>>>>> will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, and your participation >>>>>>>>> would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is >>>>>>>>>> this coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full >>>>>>>>>> details are included in my previous email and I've updated the >>>>>>>>>> etherpad >>>>>>>>>> with those planning to attend. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time for >>>>>>>>>>> the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full details of >>>>>>>>>>> the call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward to >>>>>>>>>>> speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will appear >>>>>>>>>>> on the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the link with >>>>>>>>>>> the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if you do not >>>>>>>>>>> want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you call in. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing devices: >>>>>>>>>>> pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>>>> and I've >>>>>>>>>>> also added the names of those who indicated they were available for the >>>>>>>>>>> call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the call >>>>>>>>>>> without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea of >>>>>>>>>>> numbers. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and thanks >>>>>>>>>>>> to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant documents too. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base again >>>>>>>>>>>> in the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here >>>>>>>>>>>> provide rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to >>>>>>>>>>>> set up a conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to decide >>>>>>>>>>>> next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we suggest >>>>>>>>>>>> only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to some IGC >>>>>>>>>>>> folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion only. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next week >>>>>>>>>>>> (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link too. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a >>>>>>>>>>>>> couple of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy >>>>>>>>>>>>> are saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>> information/discussing things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>> separately, would merging the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, >>>>>>>>>>>>> what we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>> and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that we >>>>>>>>>>>>> would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many of >>>>>>>>>>>>> us also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with >>>>>>>>>>>>> identifying volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and find a >>>>>>>>>>>>> common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need to >>>>>>>>>>>>> devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> constituted and why? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been able to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU >>>>>>>>>>>>>> WCIT was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> important, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and outside >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having >>>>>>>>>>>>>> hidden agendas >>>>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So >>>>>>>>>>>>>> whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and informal, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in us >>>>>>>>>>>>>> investing >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> processes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could resuscitate >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I >>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think >>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -O - >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sivasubramanian M >>> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> >> -- >> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William >> Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >> > -- “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Tue Apr 2 08:40:49 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (sivasubramanian muthusamy (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 18:10:49 +0530 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: I suggest we reach out to some of the WSIS time CS leaders who built the IGC to step in and direct the course of action. Also, is there a way to draw up a spread sheet to find how many are not subscribed to both the lists? On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, 5:59 PM Deirdre Williams wrote: > I agree with Siva and Remmy BUT who is going to bell the cat? (who will do > the things suggested) > Deirdre > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 03:13, sivasubramanian muthusamy < > 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Is there a comparitive list of best bit subscribers and IGC members? Who >> is in bestbits while not being part of IGC? >> >> Also, what are there other related CS lists discussing IG issues, if not >> comprehensively, issues such as Privacy, Security, Community Access? Why >> not invite them to be a part of a larger IG Caucus, irrespective of whether >> they physically and regularly participate in the global IGF? >> >> Is there a way of reaching out to NRIs to ask for the list of CS >> participants in NRIs? >> >> Not merely consolidate, but also expand. A wider CS could bring in >> creative solutions to the IG process and cause a balance. >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> >> On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, 5:56 PM Deirdre Williams >> wrote: >> >>> Dear Sivasubramanian, >>> (Apologies for cross-posting) >>> Although various people have pointed to the need for a common voice for >>> civil society in this arena it really seems that there is no longer an >>> appetite for the individual effort needed for a successful collaboration of >>> this type. I would be very happy to have this opinion drowned by a chorus >>> of voices proving me wrong, but I am not expecting to hear them. >>> So I wonder if we should be looking for a new means to and a new process >>> for collaboration? >>> Should this be included in the agenda under 2 - Concrete ways forward? >>> I don't have any real suggestions. I think that, more now than before, >>> the process depends on individuals being willing to make a commitment of >>> time energy and effort, and that this is happening in a context where the >>> general ethos has lost its encouragement of sharing and communal energy. >>> It needs to become possible again to perceive a common good. Should this >>> happen by painstakingly linking very small local initiatives, where the >>> "common good" is easy to see, rather than attempting things on a global >>> scale (which in fact is "top down")? >>> Hopefully the discussion on 9th will take us nearer to a solution. >>> Best wishes >>> Deirdre >>> >>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 at 16:41, Sivasubramanian M <6.Internet at gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only about >>>> 8 respondents. >>>> >>>> Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll >>>> announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. >>>> (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than >>>> say "future of IG Civil Society". >>>> >>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >>>>> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >>>>> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >>>>> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >>>>> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >>>>> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >>>>> on the issues we work on. >>>>> >>>>> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >>>>> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >>>>> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >>>>> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >>>>> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >>>>> forward. >>>>> >>>>> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be >>>>> great if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and >>>>> set up a room. >>>>> >>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >>>>> >>>>> *Suggested agenda* >>>>> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >>>>> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >>>>> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >>>>> >>>>> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> Sheetal. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have >>>>>> attached the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included >>>>>> at the top in case useful. >>>>>> >>>>>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half >>>>>> spent discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 >>>>>> hour) and the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other >>>>>> key members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>>>>> >>>>>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way to >>>>>> promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change the >>>>>> current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way forward >>>>>> which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible range of >>>>>> opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, please do >>>>>> chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up call. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks again. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great to >>>>>>> hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill out >>>>>>> the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next >>>>>>> steps next week. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to those >>>>>>>> who have responded already. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, >>>>>>>> by using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set >>>>>>>> of discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a >>>>>>>>> survey below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a >>>>>>>>> call on February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it >>>>>>>>> was agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>>>>> calls. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to >>>>>>>>> complete the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please >>>>>>>>> complete the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any questions >>>>>>>>> at all, don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For >>>>>>>>>> those who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants >>>>>>>>>> and notes here: >>>>>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and >>>>>>>>>> IGC have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, >>>>>>>>>> particularly when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a >>>>>>>>>> survey to both lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward >>>>>>>>>> which were discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with >>>>>>>>>> the broader communities feed into a decision on the future of the >>>>>>>>>> platforms. The survey will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, >>>>>>>>>> and your participation would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is >>>>>>>>>>> this coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full >>>>>>>>>>> details are included in my previous email and I've updated the >>>>>>>>>>> etherpad >>>>>>>>>>> with those planning to attend. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time >>>>>>>>>>>> for the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full details >>>>>>>>>>>> of the call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward to >>>>>>>>>>>> speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will appear >>>>>>>>>>>> on the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the link with >>>>>>>>>>>> the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if you do not >>>>>>>>>>>> want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you call in. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing devices: >>>>>>>>>>>> pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>>>>> and I've >>>>>>>>>>>> also added the names of those who indicated they were available for the >>>>>>>>>>>> call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the call >>>>>>>>>>>> without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea of >>>>>>>>>>>> numbers. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and >>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant >>>>>>>>>>>>> documents too. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base again >>>>>>>>>>>>> in the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here >>>>>>>>>>>>> provide rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to >>>>>>>>>>>>> set up a conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to decide >>>>>>>>>>>>> next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we suggest >>>>>>>>>>>>> only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to some IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>> folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion only. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next week >>>>>>>>>>>>> (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link too. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> couple of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>>> information/discussing things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>> separately, would merging the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started >>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>> would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> us also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> identifying volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constituted and why? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been able to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WCIT was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> important, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outside of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hidden agendas >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and informal, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us investing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> processes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could resuscitate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -O - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 >>>>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir >>> William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>> >> > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joly at punkcast.com Tue Apr 2 09:04:17 2019 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 09:04:17 -0400 Subject: [governance] WEBCAST TUE/WED: Net Inclusion 2019 in Charlotte NC Message-ID: About to begin. The NDIA's website includes this definition: *Digital Inclusion refers to the activities necessary to ensure that all individuals and communities, including the most disadvantaged, have access to and use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). This includes 5 elements: 1) affordable, robust broadband internet service; 2) internet-enabled devices that meet the needs of the user; 3) access to digital literacy training; 4) quality technical support; and 5) applications and online content designed to enable and encourage self-sufficiency, participation and collaboration. Digital Inclusion must evolve as technology advances. Digital Inclusion requires intentional strategies and investments to reduce and eliminate historical, institutional and structural barriers to access and use technology.* [image: Livestream] On *April 1-3 2019* the *National Digital Inclusion Alliance * hosts *Net Inclusion 2019 * in Charlotte NC. This annual event focuses on digital inclusion issues, covering topics that include local, state, and federal policies affecting digital equity; sources of financial and program support; and effective practices from around the country. Plenary sessions will be *webcast live *, and simulcast via the *Internet Society Livestream Channel *. *VIEW ON LIVESTREAM: https://livestream.com/internetsociety/netinclusion2019/ * *INFO: https://www.digitalinclusion.org/netinclusion2019/ * *FULL AGENDA: https://netinclusion2019.sched.com/ * *TWITTER" #netinclusion2019 https://bit.ly/netinclusion2019 * *The conference is being funded in part by the Knight Foundation .* *Permalink* https://isoc.live/11012/ - -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast -------------------------------------------------------------- - -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Tue Apr 2 09:26:23 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (Deirdre Williams (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 09:26:23 -0400 Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps In-Reply-To: References: <8D71D649-A51E-46AF-8D8B-AED60C36E200@gmail.com> <8802be36445e41c89f014ac507e7cd5f@syr.edu> <6bb74092-192b-8370-b0e8-1987dd61e8e2@malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: I suspect that the actors that we have are the ones who are "here"; there has already been a protest in this discussion against looking to the "old ones" for guidance. In the matter of the membership lists - my (very unreliable) memory suggests that there was formerly an issue of privacy about membership? (Can anyone help with this? Imran? Jeremy?) For myself I have always followed several of the discussions - IGC, then Bestbits, then JNC. The groups that broke away from IGC to an extent carried a particular perspective with them; to get a comprehensive view it was important for me to listen to everyone in so far as that is possible. However, as Siva pointed out earlier, those three groups are NOT the whole of civil society (which is part of my concern about CSCG, which includes APC and NCUC but is still a long way from "all".) We could begin by asking those taking part in this current discussion to declare their affiliations? That's the best I can suggest at the moment :-) Deirdre On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 08:41, sivasubramanian muthusamy <6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: > I suggest we reach out to some of the WSIS time CS leaders who built the > IGC to step in and direct the course of action. > > Also, is there a way to draw up a spread sheet to find how many are not > subscribed to both the lists? > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, 5:59 PM Deirdre Williams > wrote: > >> I agree with Siva and Remmy BUT who is going to bell the cat? (who will >> do the things suggested) >> Deirdre >> >> On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 03:13, sivasubramanian muthusamy < >> 6.internet at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Is there a comparitive list of best bit subscribers and IGC members? Who >>> is in bestbits while not being part of IGC? >>> >>> Also, what are there other related CS lists discussing IG issues, if not >>> comprehensively, issues such as Privacy, Security, Community Access? Why >>> not invite them to be a part of a larger IG Caucus, irrespective of whether >>> they physically and regularly participate in the global IGF? >>> >>> Is there a way of reaching out to NRIs to ask for the list of CS >>> participants in NRIs? >>> >>> Not merely consolidate, but also expand. A wider CS could bring in >>> creative solutions to the IG process and cause a balance. >>> >>> Sivasubramanian M >>> >>> Sivasubramanian M >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, 5:56 PM Deirdre Williams < >>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Sivasubramanian, >>>> (Apologies for cross-posting) >>>> Although various people have pointed to the need for a common voice for >>>> civil society in this arena it really seems that there is no longer an >>>> appetite for the individual effort needed for a successful collaboration of >>>> this type. I would be very happy to have this opinion drowned by a chorus >>>> of voices proving me wrong, but I am not expecting to hear them. >>>> So I wonder if we should be looking for a new means to and a new >>>> process for collaboration? >>>> Should this be included in the agenda under 2 - Concrete ways forward? >>>> I don't have any real suggestions. I think that, more now than before, >>>> the process depends on individuals being willing to make a commitment of >>>> time energy and effort, and that this is happening in a context where the >>>> general ethos has lost its encouragement of sharing and communal energy. >>>> It needs to become possible again to perceive a common good. Should >>>> this happen by painstakingly linking very small local initiatives, where >>>> the "common good" is easy to see, rather than attempting things on a global >>>> scale (which in fact is "top down")? >>>> Hopefully the discussion on 9th will take us nearer to a solution. >>>> Best wishes >>>> Deirdre >>>> >>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 at 16:41, Sivasubramanian M <6.Internet at gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> With apologies for cross-posting, I see a limited response, only about >>>>> 8 respondents. >>>>> >>>>> Is there a corresponding message on the IGC list? Possibly the poll >>>>> announcement hasn't reached those who are subscribed only to the IGC list. >>>>> (or because the title of the message says "future of Bestbits" rather than >>>>> say "future of IG Civil Society". >>>>> >>>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:41 PM Sheetal Kumar >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>> >>>>>> It's been really great to see the level of engagement in these >>>>>> conversations about strengthening civil society coordination, and I know >>>>>> there's a lot of interest in not losing motivation. The conversations have >>>>>> been premised on a general interest in changing the current situation >>>>>> (namely Bestbits being inactive as a coordination network), and >>>>>> collectively finding ways to strengthen global civil society coordination >>>>>> on the issues we work on. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hopefully the conversations so far, and the survey which gathered a >>>>>> broader array of views, have been helpful. I attached a summary report of >>>>>> the survey in my last email. At the last IGF in Paris there was discussion >>>>>> of holding a meeting at RightsCon this year. Before we do that however, it >>>>>> would be good to discuss the responses to the survey and agree a way >>>>>> forward. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm including a doodle below, with a suggested agenda. It would be >>>>>> great if you could fill it out by 29 March so I can confirm the date and >>>>>> set up a room. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/vyfn2zdxzt8wqzis >>>>>> >>>>>> *Suggested agenda* >>>>>> 1) Responses to the survey: a discussion >>>>>> 2) Suggestion of concrete ways forward >>>>>> 3) Meeting at RightsCon? >>>>>> >>>>>> Looking forward to building on your energy and contributions so far! >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:43, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you very much to those who completed the survey. I have >>>>>>> attached the anonymised results as a text document, with a summary included >>>>>>> at the top in case useful. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As a next step I would suggest a split call, with the first half >>>>>>> spent discussing the results and suggesting a way forward (45 minutes-1 >>>>>>> hour) and the second half, if deemed necessary, with IGC founders and other >>>>>>> key members of IGC. We could arrange that as a separate call too. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The aim of the calls so far and the survey have been to find a way >>>>>>> to promote *more* civil society coordination, and thus to change >>>>>>> the current state of affairs. I hope that they help in finding a way >>>>>>> forward which does this and in so doing, responds to the widest possible >>>>>>> range of opinion. Should you have any other suggestions on how to proceed, >>>>>>> please do chime in! Otherwise, I'll send around a doodle for a follow up >>>>>>> call. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks again. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best >>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:02, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We've received a useful number of responses but it would be great >>>>>>>> to hear from more people about the future of Bestbits. If you could fill >>>>>>>> out the survey by COB this Friday that would be much appreciated. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'll then likely send out a doodle for another call to decide next >>>>>>>> steps next week. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 11:58, Sheetal Kumar >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We've got some great responses to the survey so thank you to those >>>>>>>>> who have responded already. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The survey is still open so please do lend your views if you can, >>>>>>>>> by using the link below. The survey responses will feed into the next set >>>>>>>>> of discussions on the future of Bestbits. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> index&sid=528319 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:37, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Following a call and discussion on this thread, please see a >>>>>>>>>> survey below to gather your views on the future of Bestbits. Following a >>>>>>>>>> call on February 11 with members of Bestbits, as well as members of IGC, it >>>>>>>>>> was agreed that a survey would be circulated to gather views of all members. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The survey is preceded by a background information note which >>>>>>>>>> includes a summary of the discussions so far, and links to the summaries of >>>>>>>>>> calls. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=528319&lang=en >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> As a member of the Bestbits mailing list, you are invited to >>>>>>>>>> complete the survey. To inform future discussions in a timely way, please >>>>>>>>>> complete the survey *by 08 March*. Should you have any questions >>>>>>>>>> at all, don't hesitate to get in touch. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing your views! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 20:08, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you to those who participated in the call yesterday. For >>>>>>>>>>> those who couldn't attend the call, you'll find the list of participants >>>>>>>>>>> and notes here: >>>>>>>>>>> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> We had a rich discussion about the possible ways forward for >>>>>>>>>>> Bestbits, building on the previous conversation in December and the >>>>>>>>>>> discussion on this thread since. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In essence, there was general agreement that both Bestbits and >>>>>>>>>>> IGC have been facing challenges in fulfilling their objectives, >>>>>>>>>>> particularly when it comes to coordination and we agreed to circulate a >>>>>>>>>>> survey to both lists to gather perspectives on four suggested ways forward >>>>>>>>>>> which were discussed on the call. It was suggested that this survey with >>>>>>>>>>> the broader communities feed into a decision on the future of the >>>>>>>>>>> platforms. The survey will be circulated shortly to both lists shortly, >>>>>>>>>>> and your participation would be greatly appreciated. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 16:47, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This is just a gentle reminder that the call on next steps is >>>>>>>>>>>> this coming Monday, 11 February from* 4- 6 PM UTC*. The full >>>>>>>>>>>> details are included in my previous email and I've updated the >>>>>>>>>>>> etherpad >>>>>>>>>>>> with those planning to attend. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to speaking to you then! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:07, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for filling out the doodle! It seems the best time >>>>>>>>>>>>> for the call is* 4-6 PM UTC on February 11*. The full details >>>>>>>>>>>>> of the call, including how to join, are below. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Farzaneh for setting up the room. Looking forward to >>>>>>>>>>>>> speaking to as many of you as possible on the 11th! >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Bestbits call: Future pathways * >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Date and time: * >>>>>>>>>>>>> 11 February, 4:00-6:00 PM UTC >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Online Meeting room: * >>>>>>>>>>>>> To join the Meeting: >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bluejeans.com/819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To join via Room System: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Video Conferencing System: bjn.vc -or-199.48.152.152 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To join via phone : >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Dial: >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.740.7256 (US (San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.888.240.2560 (US Toll Free) >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.408.317.9253 (US (Primary, San Jose)) >>>>>>>>>>>>> (see all numbers - http://bluejeans.com/numbers) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Enter Conference ID : 819760256 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please note that if you call in, your phone number will appear >>>>>>>>>>>>> on the Bluejeans room page. We would like to record and share the link with >>>>>>>>>>>>> the BestBits network on the mailing list. Please let us know if you do not >>>>>>>>>>>>> want the recording to be shared on an open mailing list if you call in. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Proposed agenda: * >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Aim: *to discuss the future of the Bestbits and IGC lists, >>>>>>>>>>>>> including the possibility of a merger + other options >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment of >>>>>>>>>>>>> new/maintenance of status quo - using lists as information sharing devices: >>>>>>>>>>>>> pros and cons of each >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of the lists >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *RSVP on etherpad* >>>>>>>>>>>>> I've put the agenda in this pad >>>>>>>>>>>>> and I've >>>>>>>>>>>>> also added the names of those who indicated they were available for the >>>>>>>>>>>>> call at this time. Of course, as a Bestbits member you can join the call >>>>>>>>>>>>> without indicating that in the pad, this is just to have a vague idea of >>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 14:13, Sheetal Kumar < >>>>>>>>>>>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's been great to see the engagement on this topic, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks to those who have shared their perspectives and the relevant >>>>>>>>>>>>>> documents too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In December when we had the call we agreed to touch base >>>>>>>>>>>>>> again in the middle of January to agree a way forward. The discussions here >>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide rich ground for the discussion, and Farzaneh has kindly offered to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> set up a conference call space for us. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am circulating below a doodle for our second call to decide >>>>>>>>>>>>>> next steps. This is a suggested agenda: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Identification/agreement of challenges and issues faced in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> each network >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Discussion of options, e.g merger of lists/establishment >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of new/maintenance of status quo, e.g using lists as information sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>>> devices: pros and cons of each approach >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Discussion of next steps/agreement on process for decision >>>>>>>>>>>>>> making regarding future of Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Having spoken to those who arranged the last call, we suggest >>>>>>>>>>>>>> only Bestbits members are invited but that we also reach out to some IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>>> folks to help provide some background and inform the discussion only. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://doodle.com/poll/yzmbvibwp6n4s976 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If everyone could fill out the doodle by the end of next week >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Friday, 25 Jan) we can set a time and send the conference room link too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sheetal. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:10, Deirdre Williams < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse the cross-posting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been following this discussion with care, and have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couple of questions which seem to fall in line with what Nnenna and Jeremy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. If we had more or less stopped sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information/discussing things/ working together within IGC and Bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separately, would merging the two groups again really improve participation? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Is there a way for us to look at what needs to be done, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we want to do, how we want to do it? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Who are "we"? Are we the same as the people who started >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGC and Bestbits - same objectives, same perceptions and perspectives, same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> priorities? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Without answers to these questions it seems unlikely that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would make much progress. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Purely as an illustration please consider IRPC (which many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of us also belong to) which is currently having some difficulty with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> identifying volunteers to carry out management tasks for the group. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Civil society still needs a means to discuss issues and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a common voice, but is this the right way to do that now or do we need to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> devise something different? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes for 2019 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Deirdre >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 14:09, Jeremy Malcolm < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who were part of the first Steering Committee >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Bestbits - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > could you share more information about how it was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constituted and why? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysfunctional, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been able to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WCIT was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was important, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so a few conversations between people both inside and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outside of IGC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committee. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But then the same civil society politics that had driven >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the IGC into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (misplaced but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> damaging) allegations about various participants having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hidden agendas >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whereas the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> original committee had been fairly lightweight and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> informal, pressure to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us investing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> processes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engage in these new processes, indicating that the more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lightweight >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure had probably been better. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a group of willing people who could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resuscitate Best Bits, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prostasia >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Foundation now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -O - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B >>>>>>>>>>> E9E2 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sheetal Kumar* >>>>>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514 | >>>>>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31 | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 >>>>>> 0603 DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31| >>>>>> >>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>>> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir >>>> William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William >> Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >> > -- “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From governance at lists.riseup.net Wed Apr 3 05:43:47 2019 From: governance at lists.riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Ars=C3=A8ne?= Tungali (via governance Mailing List)) Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 11:43:47 +0200 Subject: [governance] IGF 2019 Reminders from the IGF Secretariat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ________________________________ De : Anja Gengo Envoyé : mercredi 3 avril 2019 09:18 À : igfregionals at intgovforum.org Objet : [NRIs List] IGF 2019 Reminders from the IGF Secretariat Dear Colleagues, The IGF Secretariat would like to share a few reminders related to the IGF 2019 preparatory process: ________________________________ Ø Call for all National, Regional and Youth IGFs (NRIs) to suggest topics of interest All NRIs are kindly invited to submit three topics of priority for their communities. These will help orienting substantive focus of the NRIs joint/main session and collaborative sessions. · Submission link: https://goo.gl/forms/xvnRHmFJdYOlTEku2 · Who submitted so far? https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hlyz_Pg0Cl3rWgMPvCn3Ltxt8ZxXm-5PWR7YqqG4nLc/edit?usp=sharing · Deadline to submit: 5 April 2019, 23:59 p.m. UTC ________________________________ Ø Register for the 2nd IGF Open Consultations and MAG Meeting: 9 – 11 April, Geneva [link to IGF website] The second face-to-face IGF 2019 Open Consultations and MAG meeting will take place on 9 - 11 April 2019 at the Room A of the ITU building in Geneva, Switzerland. The meeting will be hosted during the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Forum. · Time and Date: 9 - 11 April 2019 at the Room A of the ITU building in Geneva, Switzerland · Registration link: https://www.itu.int/net4/wsis/forum/2019/Home/Registration · Other information available at: https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2019-second-open-consultations-and-mag-meeting?qt-igf_2019_second_open_consultatio=1#qt-igf_2019_second_open_consultatio ________________________________ Ø Call for Workshop Proposals [link to IGF website] All stakeholders are invited to submit proposals to hold workshops at the IGF 2019 annual meeting. The proposers are invited to make submissions on the three themes: 1. Data Governance; 2. Digital Inclusion; 3. Security, Safety, Stability & Resilience. · Submission form: https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2019-workshop-proposal-form · Brief manual on workshop submission and evaluation process? https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/index.php?q=filedepot_download/7635/1530 · Deadline to submit: 12 April 2019, 23:59 p.m. UTC ________________________________ Ø Call for Open Forums [link to IGF website] All Governments, treaty-based international organizations, and global organizations with international scope and presence, with operations across regions, dealing with Internet governance-related issues, are invited to submit requests for an Open Forum slot · Submission form: https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2019-open-forums-submission-form · Deadline to submit: 12 April 2019, 23:59 p.m. UTC ________________________________ Ø Call for IGF Village [link to IGF website] During the annual IGF meeting, interested stakeholders can display or distribute relevant information about their IGF-related activities at the IGF Village. The IGF Village consists of display booths and is located in the meeting venue area. The booths are non-commercial in nature. They are free of charge, and allocated on a first-come, first-served basis, with respecting a balance of stakeholder and regional diversity. The total capacity of the IGF Village is limited, subject to available space at the meeting venue. · Submission form: https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2019-village-booths-submission-form · Deadline to submit: 12 April 2019, 23:59 p.m. UTC ________________________________ Ø Call for ‘Day 0’ Events [link to IGF website] Pre-events will be held on 25 November 2019, Day 0 of the 14th Annual IGF Meeting. Slots are allocated on a first-come, first-serve basis, taking into account space availability and the relevance of the requests received. The format and content of pre-events are up to the organizers, but the pre-event must have a link to Internet governance. · Submission form: https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2019-pre-events-day-0-events-submission-form · Deadline to submit: 12 April 2019, 23:59 p.m. UTC ________________________________ Ø Call for Dynamic Coalition Sessions [link to IGF website] DCs have traditionally used individual sessions to discuss related to their DC topic, and any work done by their coalition which they wish to highlight. In addition, this year DCs have the option to link their session to one of the three IGF 2019 programme themes, selectable in the submission form: (1) Data Governance; (2) Digital Inclusion; or (3) Security, Safety, Stability & Resilience. · Submission form: https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2019-dynamic-coalition-dc-sessions-submission-form · Deadline to submit: 12 April 2019, 23:59 p.m. UTC In case of any questions, please do not hesitate to contact. Best regards, Anja -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Igfregionals mailing list Igfregionals at intgovforum.org To unsubscribe or manage your options please go to http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfregionals_intgovforum.org