[IGFmaglist] Potential IGF 2017 Intersessional activities

Renata Aquino Ribeiro raquino at gmail.com
Fri Mar 24 14:53:03 EDT 2017


Dear Mamadou, Elizabeth and all

Your questions on next steps for intersessional activities to Secretariat
are quite interesting. I will join you in hoping we discuss this at our
next meeting.

About the BPF on Remote Participation - BPF RP, I am just now reading the
comments in reply. Thank you so much for them and for your support. It will
be great to discuss this theme in 2017 with you all participating.

As for the Working group on Outreach and Communication - WGCO, it has been
doing a great work and certainly actions on this direction on 2017 are much
needed. I see this group very differently than the BPF as it relates
directly to publicizing the IGF main event and its intersessionals and
helping gather participants to collaborate on IGF in the physical meeting
or in the webconferences or documents.

It is a great idea, Mamadou, a review of the intersessional activities to
go out monthly. It was always needed an integration between WGCO and the
other intersessional activities and this can be a great way to move
forward. It could gather information from something simple like a shared
calendar, an action which I believe has already been discussed but not
deeply. Thank you so much for giving your thoughts and willingness to help
on this front, it is much appreciated.

Best,

Renata







On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Mamadou LO <alfamamadou at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all
>
> As new MAG member, I fully agree with Elizabeth to clear concept in DPFs,
> DCs, and in some ways, intersessional activities (as Avri requested) so
> as to go forward. Also, I do not understand a BPF on communication along
> with a working group on online participation as both items dealing with
> Global Communication.
>
> By the way, I still think we do need to see how we can address the issue
> of support functions empowering MAG team within MAG and IGF. For example I
> see communication and informations support (weekly IG review) in those
> functions.
>
> Otherwise, I would like to suggest a monthly weekly review for each BPFs.
> The review will consist on gathering mainly news each month relating to the
> issue. Like general weekly review we actually do on global IG, the BPF
> review will be sent in the igfmag mailing list in order to help ourselves
> be aware of what happening in each BPF environment. That will help to push
> forward on issue we have to talk about and to match community IG matters.
> If this proposal meet agreement of MAG, I can go further by beginning the
> job by end of May.
> Regards
>
> *===================================================================*
>
> *Mamadou LO*
> Chef du Département Communication et Information Documentaire
> Head of Communication and Information Department
> Crédit Agricole Sénégal
> Tel : 221 77 645 59 57
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *De :* Igfmaglist <igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org> de la part de
> THOMAS-RAYNAUD Elizabeth <elizabeth.thomas-raynaud at iccwbo.org>
> *Envoyé :* vendredi 24 mars 2017 16:43
> *À :* cmasango at unog.ch; 'IGF Maglist'
> *Objet :* Re: [IGFmaglist] Potential IGF 2017 Intersessional activities
>
>
> Dear Chengetai,
>
>
>
> In recent discussions with community members we found that we lacked
> clarity about the process through which the intersessional activities are
> respectively decided upon or resources designated to support the expansion
> of additional ones. I was asked whether it was a MAG or Secretariat
> decision and what considerations differed for BPFs vs DCs, so I must ask if
> you have that answer. We’ve spoken about limiting the number of concurrent
> BPFs recently among the MAG but I couldn’t answer the question whether
> there can be an unlimited number of DCs or whether there was any
> measurement/reporting activity on the intersessional activities that set
> any standard or requirement for them to continue. Your report on 2017
> activities notes the items/proposals put forward but it doesn’t indicated
> what vetting process is required for them to go forward so is it correct to
> assume that anything not contested by MAG members is accepted?
>
>
>
> I am requesting more clarity on these questions if you or someone else
> might write and share them ahead of the virtual meeting next week so we
> discuss these topics from a common understanding on these questions. I fear
> based on recent discussions with those who’ve served longer than me on the
> MAG as well as newly appointed, without this clarity we run the risk of
> misunderstanding our task on the call due to false assumptions.
>
>
>
> There was a similar question posed about what determines whether a MAG
> Working Group goes ahead. Is it just for a member to propose and no one to
> contest or is there a critical mass that has to endorse it as a worthwhile
> pursuit? Is there an unlimited number? A process for distinguishing what
> makes sense for the MAG to consider working on and in what capacity it
> would be doing so. Having served on the WG on Outreach and Communication
> last year, I felt at times there was a confusion between what we as MAG
> could/should being doing and what was the role of the Secretariat.
>
>
>
> Also, as expressed in the meeting in Geneva and reinforced since my
> discussions with many in the community since –we must keep top of mind that
> there are finite resources of Secretariat support, MAG time and community
> members to cover and contribute to work. We risk failing to be the IGF we
> want by never saying no so I hope we can work out how even good ideas that
> aren’t contested be weighed in view of relative value, importance and
> resource impact and I urge that we need more help in assessing that.
>
>
>
> Many thanks in advance for assisting with these questions.
>
> Happy weekend to all.
>
> Elizabeth
>
>
>
> *Elizabeth THOMAS-RAYNAUD*
>
> International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
>
> Project Director, ICC Business Action to Support the Information Society
> (BASIS)
>
> Senior Policy Executive, Digital Economy
>
>
>
> *From:* Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Chengetai Masango
> *Sent:* 14 March 2017 19:54
> *To:* 'IGF Maglist'
> *Subject:* [IGFmaglist] Potential IGF 2017 Intersessional activities
>
>
>
> Dear All,
>
>
>
> Please find attached a table of the potential 2017 intesessional
> activities and their status according to the Secretariat’s recollection.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Chengetai
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20170324/5b9e3ba5/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Igfmaglist mailing list