[Wg-mwp] Where (if anywhere) to discuss IGF recommendations?

Lynn St.Amour st.amour at bluewin.ch
Tue Sep 5 09:53:01 EDT 2017


Hi Jeremy,

apologies for the delay in replying, I was on vacation last week. 

And, thank you for these questions, as we all want the IGF to be as useful as possible.  

The first meeting of the WG on Multi-year Strategic Work Programme will be held this Thursday.  As you are a member of that WG, you could bring these questions up there for the WG to consider.  Avri is one of the co-chairs of the WG on IGF Improvements and we are both committed to coherence across these 2 groups.  

Best,
Lynn


> On Aug 31, 2017, at 5:33 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:
> 
> I'm cross-posting to the Working Group on IGF Improvements and the
> Multi-year Strategic Work Programme group, because I'm not sure where
> (if anywhere) to discuss ideas for reform of the IGF that go *beyond*
> the modest suggestions for improvement agreed in the compromise
> conclusions of previous reviews.
> 
> For example, reviewing the working documents of the WG Improvements, it
> seems that only the least controversial suggestions are included,
> whereas the kind of reforms that I've always been more interested in are
> more ambitious reforms relating to the development of policy
> recommendations within the IGF, either using face-to-face deliberative
> democratic methods, and/or innovative online tools (for example:
> http://tools.dcentproject.eu/).
> 
> If these are indeed out of scope for the WG Improvements, is it suitable
> to air these more radical proposals in the Multi-Year Work Programme WG,
> or are these totally outside the "Overton window" of acceptable
> discourse about improvements to the IGF?
> 
> I would hope not, since in my view the IGF continues to face an
> existential crisis of relevance if there is *no* forum to consider more
> radical proposals (see eg. the commentary in
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20170731_igf_brexit_moment/ which paints
> the IGF as irrelevant at best, or illustrating a failure of the
> multi-stakeholder model at worst).
> 
> -- 
> Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Global Policy Analyst
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
> https://eff.org
> jmalcolm at eff.org
> 
> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
> 
> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
> 
> Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2016/11/27/key_jmalcolm.txt
> PGP fingerprint: 75D2 4C0D 35EA EA2F 8CA8 8F79 4911 EC4A EDDF 1122
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wg-mwp mailing list
> Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org





More information about the Wg-mwp mailing list