[DC] Draft submission to IGF MAG
Marianne Franklin
m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk
Mon Feb 15 05:45:05 EST 2016
Dear Markus
Happy to continue the conversation. To continue clarifying as this DC
intersessional list in a new constellation and in the process of being
formalised.
1) The DC list is primarily made up of DC representatives, those who
provided input and presented the DC work at both Main Session are the
primary constituency. Correct me if I am wrong.
a) For this reason, the November Statement represents the overwhelming
majority of DCs present as above, all signatories are on the final
letter (the etherpad was the initial drafting so is not complete, the
PDF you have is the most recent version).
b)) Any remaining signatories; the DC for persons with disabilities has
been conferring over the November document and if any other DCs were
left off they are welcome to sign on.
2) This intersessional list, called the DC list and run from the
Secretariat, also comprises others, yourself as Chair and the 2015 DC
Main Session facilitators, and IGF Secretariat representatives. We are
convening here as distinct constituencies in that regard under this DC
rubric but this is not ipso facto the same as speaking on behalf of all
DCs, or our respective DC constituencies.
As the November statement is one on behalf of all those DCs who signed
on, this process could not be subsumed, nor need it be subsumed under
the intersessional list. This is not a conflict, it is a practical
reality and underscores the committment and quality of input of all
those DCs whose work provided the basis for these inaugural Main
Sessions. The Consultative Platform and the rating sheet exercise were
two ways to garner feedback to DC work presented at these sessions.
3) The discussion is now about a second statement being drafted by the
Main Session Facilitators to which DCs are being asked to contribute on
the intersessional list. Much of the November statement is being
repeated in this second text so it appears superfluous to requirements
The new, second statement has its own points to make and is, as is made
clear already, in the name of the 2015 Main Session facilitators.
Hence my motion that two statements go forward so better to reflect the
make-up of the intersessional list that we are in the process of
formalizing. One statement is complete and open for any remaining DCs to
sign if they wish.
This is transparency at its best to my mind.
6) Finally, our consultations on the DC intersessional list include
discussions about representation, process, and transparency so I
appreciate this opportunity to move that conversation forward.
best wishes
MF
On 15/02/2016 11:23, Markus Kummer wrote:
> Dear Marianne,
>
> I fully understand the nature of the document. Just a small
> correction:not all DCs signed up — two did not!
>
> Many thanks for sharing the link to the etherpad document.This
> addresses in part my comments regarding the transparency of the
> process, but not fully. I was not aware of this link and I don’t think
> an invite was ever sent out on the DC list. I take it that the process
> is archived in your DC archives. This may need further discussion, but
> I for one think that it is confusing if any one DC holds the archives
> for a common process. I would have thought that any common activity
> would be archived on the DC list and supported by the IGF Secretariat,
> as is the entire process since Joao Pessoa.
>
> My main point however was that the stocktaking statement has been
> overtaken by our discussion since then. Lastly, I fully agree with
> your point of order. It is definitely preferred that each DC has its
> own internal process to determine whether it can sign on to the
> statement prepared by Jeremy.
>
> I look forward to a continued constructive discussion on how to
> improve and strengthen the DC coordination process!
>
> Best regards
> Markus
>
>
> On 15 Feb 2016, at 10:31, Marianne Franklin <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk
> <mailto:m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>> wrote:
>
>> Dear Markus
>>
>> The misunderstanding appears to continue. I did not submit a paper in
>> my own name.
>>
>> The November Stocktaking Statement was drafted, conferred over, and
>> then edited and signed by all DC signatories. I simply sent it
>> through on behalf of all DCs.
>>
>> The etherpad is open for view if confirmation of this process is
>> needed; https://public.etherpad-mozilla.org/p/DCs_Stocktaking_Statement
>>
>> The signed statement was indeed forwarded to the DC meeting, and was
>> noted as received. My own email archives confirm this as do records
>> of the DC meetings.
>>
>> It is not clear at all how the impression has been given that the
>> November statement was done "quickly, with fresh impressions
>> immediately after the meeting. However, in terms of process it does
>> not live up to the standards of transparency and openness we hope to
>> adhere to collectively.".
>>
>> A point of order too, if I may. All of us on this DC list are
>> representing our respective DCs. We cannot speak in the name of
>> others without full consultation at least with respective steering
>> committees.
>>
>> The November statement sums up the main points adequately and was
>> with input from a wider range of participants.
>>
>> This new statement is useful too. I was not suggesting otherwise.
>>
>> best
>> MF
>>
>>
>> On 15/02/2016 10:12, Markus Kummer wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> We seem to create some unnecessary misunderstandings. The paper
>>> Jeremy produced is the result of the stocktaking process we started
>>> after the Brazil meeting. We held a number of calls, all documented
>>> on the CD list, and agreed to produce a paper as an input into the
>>> call for contributions issued by the IGF Secetariat. We also agreed
>>> to continue working on the draft TOR for the coordination group with
>>> the aim to conclude this process well in advance of the April MAG
>>> meeting/open consultations.
>>>
>>> The paper Marianne mentioned provided a useful input into our
>>> collective process. However, in many ways it has been overtaken by
>>> events, as we started discussing how to set up the coordination
>>> group and we also discussed what worked well and what worked less
>>> well at the DC session last November. Jeremy’s paper sums up this
>>> discussion. We have a few more days for DCs to sign up to this paper
>>> — either as DC or, if there is not sufficient time for internal
>>> consultation, in their individual capacity.
>>>
>>> I would therefore suggest focusing on Jeremy’s paper and not
>>> confusing matters by submitting two papers with slightly conflicting
>>> messages. Furthermore, I understand that the other paper was
>>> produced quickly, with fresh impressions immediately after the
>>> meeting. However, in terms of process it does not live up to the
>>> standards of transparency and openness we hope to adhere to
>>> collectively. It was never submitted for comments on the DC list and
>>> it should all be noted that two DCs (and not just one) did not sign
>>> up to it.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Markus
>>>
>>>
>>> On 15 Feb 2016, at 09:31, Marianne Franklin
>>> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear all
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Marie-Laure as I too have been unclear. Just to clarify and
>>>> so forgo any further misunderstandings.
>>>>
>>>> The PDF I attached was a resending of a Stocktaking statement that
>>>> all DCs prepared and tabled at the first meeting after the IGF in
>>>> Brazil. It is dated 25 November and the minutes show that it has
>>>> been tabled.
>>>>
>>>> The Google.doc text is one that Jeremy drafted, a second document
>>>> in fact and from the point of view of the two DC Main Session
>>>> facilitators.
>>>>
>>>> The November DC Stocktaking Statement has already been tabled,
>>>> signed by all DCs pending word back from Andrea. So then it s ready
>>>> to forward to the MAG if it has not been already.
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>> MF
>>>>
>>>> On 15/02/2016 07:15, Marie-Laure Lemineur wrote:
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Can someone please clarify why the text of the PDF attached by
>>>>> Marianne varies from the google.doc version? I take it that the
>>>>> latest version is the google.doc version. Is this correct?
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, what happened to the paragraph about the DC Coordination
>>>>> group mentioned in the PDF version but not in the Google.doc
>>>>> draft? Is there an agreement to avoid mentioning this issue at
>>>>> this stage or is it due to an oversight?
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Marie-laure
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Marie-Laure Lemineur*
>>>>> Head of Programme, Combating Sexual Exploitation of Children Online
>>>>> *
>>>>> *
>>>>> *<Mail Attachment.png>ECPAT International*
>>>>> ————————————-
>>>>> 328/1 Phaya Thai Road
>>>>> Bangkok 10400,Thailand
>>>>> Tel: + 66 (0) 2 215 3388
>>>>> Fax: + 66 (0) 2 215 8272
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.ecpat.net <http://www.ecpat.net/>
>>>>>
>>>>> De: Marianne Franklin <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
>>>>> Fecha: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 13:56:35 +0100
>>>>> Para: <dc at intgovforum.org>
>>>>> Asunto: Re: [DC] Draft submission to IGF MAG
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear all
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you Jeremy for the drafting this second submission to the
>>>>> MAG stocktaking from the DC intersessional.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are some important points being made here that reiterate but
>>>>> also supplement those already made by the November DC Stocktaking
>>>>> Report.
>>>>>
>>>>> In order not to reinvent the wheel and to provide space in this
>>>>> second statement to go into more detail about the way future DC
>>>>> main sessions can be organized, or any output tool incorporated, I
>>>>> would like to make the following suggestions
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) The current DC Stocktaking Document signed by all DCs pending a
>>>>> response from one remaining, is sent to the MAG. It is addressed
>>>>> to the MAG and represents all DCs to date. It was tabled at our
>>>>> intersessional meetings so can be sent forward. I am attaching the
>>>>> PDF again for good measure.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Alongside the November DC statement, that this second draft
>>>>> statement be readied as one being written on behalf of the DC Main
>>>>> Session Facilitators (Jeremy and Avri) with eventual endorsement
>>>>> from any DC or individual in the short time remaining.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why? This second statement has a clear provenance, and for that
>>>>> reason can more clearly address the specifics of
>>>>> a) Main session organization between one or two days
>>>>> b) How any rating tool is designed and executed for future DC Main
>>>>> sessions
>>>>> c) Underscore points already made about suitable DC representation
>>>>> and contributions to IGF meetings in the future, with Mexico as
>>>>> the next one on the agenda.
>>>>>
>>>>> Two statements are better then one because they represent two
>>>>> distinct constituencies engaged in the preparation and outcomes of
>>>>> the first DC Main Session last year.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, if I can turn to my own observations on this second statement.
>>>>>
>>>>> i) The working text is in Google docs so this precludes those of
>>>>> us who prefer not to register with Google for this sort of work. I
>>>>> cannot speak for all, but I for one do not use Google docs anymore.
>>>>>
>>>>> ii) There is mention of one brand of survey/rating tool. This
>>>>> assumes that this brand is suitable for all future uses. I would
>>>>> beg to differ in that it is one related to a particular sort of
>>>>> format. As there are serious issues with how this particular brand
>>>>> was designed and deployed in Brazil I would suggest that a more
>>>>> generic term is used so that future applications of any sort of
>>>>> numerical rating tool, if deemed useful, can be up to the usual
>>>>> methodological standard of survey-based, or statistical analysis.
>>>>>
>>>>> And one more, apologies for the long mail but have to catch up;
>>>>>
>>>>> iii) DCs all have different timescales for consultation and
>>>>> endorsement procedures so if this second statement goes forward,
>>>>> it needs to be clearly signed off to that effect i.e. who is
>>>>> signing on behalf of whom.
>>>>>
>>>>> best
>>>>> MF
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/02/2016 01:58, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>>>>> With apologies for the delay, and as promised at the last meeting, I am
>>>>>> sharing a short draft submission to the IGF MAG in response to its
>>>>>> current taking stock consultation, which I hope we can discuss at our
>>>>>> phone meeting tomorrow:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14yEXAod58zK-ZqKPSgCC_OIBIntOm3wySWZ1hszH2Lk/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be due for submission by the 12th. If anyone cannot (or does
>>>>>> not wish to) access Google Docs, please let me know and I'll email you a
>>>>>> copy. Looking forward to discussing soon!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> DC mailing list
>>>>>> DC at intgovforum.orghttp://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/dc_intgovforum.org
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Marianne Franklin, PhD
>>>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics
>>>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
>>>>> Goldsmiths (University of London)
>>>>> Department of Media & Communications
>>>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW
>>>>> Tel: +44 20 7919 7072
>>>>> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
>>>>> @GloComm
>>>>> https://twitter.com/GloCommhttp://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/
>>>>> Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
>>>>> Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF)
>>>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>>>>> @netrights
>>>>> _______________________________________________ DC mailing list
>>>>> DC at intgovforum.org <mailto:DC at intgovforum.org>
>>>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/dc_intgovforum.org
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Marianne Franklin, PhD
>>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics
>>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
>>>> Goldsmiths (University of London)
>>>> Department of Media & Communications
>>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW
>>>> Tel: +44 20 7919 7072
>>>> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
>>>> @GloComm
>>>> https://twitter.com/GloComm
>>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
>>>> https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/
>>>> Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
>>>> Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF)
>>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>>>> @netrights
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> DC mailing list
>>>> DC at intgovforum.org <mailto:DC at intgovforum.org>
>>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/dc_intgovforum.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> DC mailing list
>>> DC at intgovforum.org
>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/dc_intgovforum.org
>>
>> --
>> Marianne Franklin, PhD
>> Professor of Global Media and Politics
>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
>> Goldsmiths (University of London)
>> Department of Media & Communications
>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW
>> Tel: +44 20 7919 7072
>> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
>> @GloComm
>> https://twitter.com/GloComm
>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
>> https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/
>> Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
>> Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF)
>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>> @netrights
>> _______________________________________________
>> DC mailing list
>> DC at intgovforum.org <mailto:DC at intgovforum.org>
>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/dc_intgovforum.org
>
--
Marianne Franklin, PhD
Professor of Global Media and Politics
Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
Goldsmiths (University of London)
Department of Media & Communications
New Cross, London SE14 6NW
Tel: +44 20 7919 7072
<m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
@GloComm
https://twitter.com/GloComm
http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/
Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF)
www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
@netrights
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/dc_intgovforum.org/attachments/20160215/1e93279f/attachment.html>
More information about the DC
mailing list