[Wg-mwp] WG-MWP: 2018 WG Status Report

[Lynn St.Amour]

Dear Siva,

the document we are currently working from was originally shared in a mail thread beginning on 30.10.2018 titled: WG-MWP: Webex meeting invitation & Draft Agenda - October 30th, 2018  1500 -1600 UTC (not particularly helpful).   It was reviewed by several members and updated and the current draft is one I sent last night in an email thread: WG-MWP: 2018 WG Status Report.  We had to switch to a word document as some members cannot access Google docs from their workplace.

Apologies if this wasn’t clear, and I very much look forward to your thoughts on the current draft.

Best,
Lynn

> On Nov 6, 2018, at 2:37 PM, sivasubramanian muthusamy <6.internet at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear Lynn
> 
> Please share the link to the current version of the Status Report document,
> if different from
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dMXFGA5r0vfMje9bka8EqyCK6QXK8NPgId0uqk4H4X0/edit#
> as I still see this as a document being edited.
> 
> 
> Sivasubramanian M <https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy>
> twitter.com/shivaindia
> 
> 
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 12:38 AM Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote:
> 
>> On 11/6/18 10:49 AM, GONZALO LOPEZ-BARAJAS HUDER wrote:
>> 
>>> 2- Regarding reference to Synmind in the last section of the paper
>> Recommendations from this WG, the wording seems also in need of
>> clarification. Despite the contact with Synmind was made with only a few of
>> the members of the WG, it seems not clear that some members did not support
>> this course of action. I would recommend the following:
>>> 
>>> " Some of the WG members proposed for the MAG to explore the possibility
>> of using a professionally facilitated process in 2019 and and discussed
>> with Synmind an offer to provide an online/offline facilitated process for
>> the IGF community. The WG did not agree on this proposal."
>> 
>> I am not comfortable with this edit since at this point it is not our
>> place to agree or disagree with it, but simply to put it before the new
>> MAG.
>> 
>>> Finally, not specific to the Status Report, regarding Wout's comments I
>> fully agree in not converting the IGF into a some sort of negotiation or
>> pseudo treaty body.
>>> 
>>> But it is my view that words point to one direction and actions into
>> some other. The minute we start talking about deliberative polls, sensing
>> the temperature for consensus building and alike processes this certainly
>> points to voting. And when there is voting, there are always text
>> negotiations.
>> 
>> I can assure you that this assumption is simply not true, though. During
>> my PhD studies I spent three years looking into deliberative democratic
>> methodologies that do not require text negotiations or voting, yet can
>> still deliver outputs. Several of these are mentioned in the Annex, and
>> I would be happy to provide you with some further reading.
>> 
>> --
>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com
>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek
>> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - -O -
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wg-mwp mailing list
>> Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
>> To unsubscribe or manage your options please go to
>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wg-mwp mailing list
> Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
> To unsubscribe or manage your options please go to http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org