[IGFmaglist] IGF Reform Proposals

Sat Oct 19 05:52:56 EDT 2013

Hi Patrick, All,

So, here's my take on all of this:

I guess you wrote this document - what is your goal for it? Are you a) aiming to get input from all interested parties and then do something with it or b) are you intending that it be developed into a MAG position or c) something else.

I woud have no problem giving you input providing that I know where this is intended to head. 

If the goal is to get to a MAG position then I have some real concerns. I think most of the points you have raised are outside the scope of the MAG and so I'm uncomfortable with the MAG as a group coming to some consensus position on these points and then lobbying to make it so. And, irrespective of my discomfort, I doubt such an approach would be effective. The MAG's time would be better spent concentrating on its mandate and doing its job. 

If the goal is to get IGF interested folks from all areas to coalesce around ways to improve the IGF then that's fine but I would counsel against using your position as a MAG member for that purpose. And I would advise against the MAG formally meeting to discuss this paper. 

I'm not seeking to close down a debate that I think is critical but rather to ensure it takes place in the right arena. I wonder whether there's any possibility of organising a last minute session open to all to discuss IGF improvements? Or maybe there is already a session that can be used for that?

Cheers,

Chris

On 19/10/2013, at 19:02 , Patrick Ryan wrote:

> Markus,
> 
> That's a fair point of clarification, and I don't think that discussion needs to be in a MAG meeting, although it could be, although your concerns about timing are noted. Truth is, there seems to never be the right time to discuss these reform issues (they're difficult and all a really heavy lift), so I think we need to seize the moment (and multiple moments, for that matter).  From my perspective, the discussions must start in earnest now, and while it would be ideal to do it in a setting with all of us together, it's also possible to do it by email and in the doc---although somewhat inefficient, that also enables the participants who were unable to make it here this year, and for non MAG members.  Thank you for your comments here by email as it already helps to advance the discussion and to hear your perspective on a couple of the points.
> 
> To your question about format, the proposal is in Google Docs not because it's a proprietary format. It should work on any browser through HTML 5, which is open sourced, and using the link eliminates the need for version control.  If anybody would like to download and store a version of the document in the version at any point in time, it can be done by opening the doc (available here), then File > Download As > then selecting whichever local format you prefer (Word, RTF, ODT, TXT or HTML).
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Patrick
> 
> P.S. I just finished this email as you walked by to say hello in the hotel lobby!  Would love to discuss live if you have a minute now.
> 
> ------
> patrick ryan 
> public policy & gov't relations sr. counsel, free expression and int'l relations
> patrickryan at google.com | +1.512.751.5346
> 
> 
> On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 12:39 AM, Markus Kummer <kummer at isoc.org> wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> It will not be possible to hold a MAG meeting on Sunday morning, as the rooms will not be available and, also, the Secretariat fully engaged with last minute preparations.
> 
> Also, I don't think that we will be able to discuss Patrick's reform proposals at our meetings in Bali - the MAG meetings will be very short and we will have to make best possible use of them to run the meeting.
> 
> However, I am happy to organise a call to discuss the paper once the meeting is over. Only two preliminary comments:
> 
> I am sure that we would all support an unlimited mandate for the IGF. However, this is out of scope for the MAG and, if anything, would be counterproductive.
> 
> I would also like to recall that the IGF Secretariat repeatedly urged the MAG to come up with a formula for selecting its members and time and again the MAG preferred to sticking to the current practice, leaving it what MAG Members used to term "the black box". I for one would strongly support any effort to develop a more transparent formula. This is clearly within the scope of the MAG.
> 
> Lastly, may I ask Patrick to send us the document he circulated as an attachment rather than using proprietary web services.
> 
> Best regards
> Markus
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 18, 2013, at 9:18 PM, angelic40 at gmail.com wrote:
> 
> > Dear Patrick,
> >
> > Yes, I am all for a discussion whether it is during one of the MAG get tot hers or just an evening over dinner or so. I will not arrive in time for a weekend session, but if I make it to Bali, I will be available starting Thursday morning.
> > I agree that an online discussion/ participation should be part of it.
> >
> > Looking forward to participating in this discussion
> > Angelic
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Oct 18, 2013, at 4:13 PM, Patrick Ryan <patrickryan at google.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Angelic,
> >>
> >> That's a really good question---we don't actually have anything set up to discuss this, although I'm hopeful that we can address it at one of the MAG meetings that has been set.  Alternatively, for those that are arriving this weekend, I would love to get together----say, on Sunday morning----to host a discussion.  I also think that it will be important to see if we can collect some of the views of colleagues that have not been able to make it to Bali for various reasons (such as the visa situation), and so I suspect that the discussion should also include some online elements (email, maybe we create another Doc that people can collaborate on) so that we can hear their views.
> >>
> >> If you or anybody has any thoughts on that, I would love to hear them.
> >>
> >> Patrick
> >>
> >> ------
> >> patrick ryan
> >> public policy & gov't relations sr. counsel, free expression and int'l relations
> >> patrickryan at google.com | +1.512.751.5346
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 5:29 AM, Angelic del Castilho <angelic40 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Dear Patrick,
> >>
> >> Thank you for this information. Is there a specific date set during the IGF in Bali for discussing this document or is the discussion only through comments online for now?
> >>
> >> Have a great day!
> >> Angelic
> >>
> >> Angelic Caroline Alihusain-del Castilho
> >> POB 3036
> >> Wanica
> >> Suriname
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Patrick Ryan <patrickryan at google.com> wrote:
> >> Dear MAG Colleagues,
> >>
> >> As we head into the IGF this year, I wanted to share some thoughts on the "top five" issues for IGF reform.  The document is in a draft form and could benefit form the thoughts and input from all of us.  It's not a private document, so feel free to share.  It's not a Google position although as I've mentioned to many, many of my colleagues at Google are very keen to make sure that we engage in serious reform discussions----starting next week.
> >>
> >> It's never easy to propose reform discussions of this kind (it's hard in any organization) and I genuinely hope that the suggestions here will be received by the UN and IGF colleagues in the positive spirit that they are intended.  We all believe strongly in the IGF and it's because of our belief in it that we should be talking about how to make it stronger.
> >>
> >> The document is available here.  Comments are really welcome and encouraged, either by email or by using the comment function of Google Docs.
> >>
> >> Sincerely,
> >>
> >> Patrick
> >>
> >> ------
> >> patrick ryan
> >> public policy & gov't relations sr. counsel, free expression and int'l relations
> >> patrickryan at google.com | +1.512.751.5346
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Igfmaglist mailing list
> >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> >> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Igfmaglist mailing list
> > Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> > http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20131019/5778846a/attachment.html>