[IGFmaglist] Potential IGF 2017 Intersessional activities

Lynn St.Amour st.amour at bluewin.ch
Mon Mar 27 12:28:02 EDT 2017


Avri,

thank you and want to fully support your comments and proposed engagements/reviews with the DCs, as this recognizes their origins.

Best,
Lynn

> On Mar 27, 2017, at 10:36 AM, avri doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> In terms of DCs, we have a set of long traditions on DC conditions,
> operations and relation to the annual meeting. which we need to write
> up, as requested by our chair at our last meeting.  This write=up has
> not been done yet.
> 
> I feel that this write-up will need to be reviewed by the DC
> Coordination group before we can present it to the MAG. I also feel that
> any changes to be made in the way DCs are treated, e.g. the condition
> for scheduling a session at the annual meeting, will need to be
> discussed within the DC Coordination group in cooperation with the MAG.
> Unlike BPFs and the so-called Intersessional topics, DCs are bottom-up
> constructions that need to adhere to certain conditions that have been
> agreed to by both the DC Coordination group and the MAG. And the place
> to start is with the description of the current conditions and
> expectations of those actually working in the DCs year round.  Am happy
> to work with Markus and Elaonora to get this done over the next few weeks.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> 
> On 24-Mar-17 12:43, THOMAS-RAYNAUD Elizabeth wrote:
>> 
>> 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, ICCBusiness 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
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org





More information about the Igfmaglist mailing list