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

GONZALO LOPEZ-BARAJAS HUDER gonzalo.lopezbarajashuder at telefonica.com
Tue Nov 6 13:49:32 EST 2018


Dear all,

            Please let me provide a few comments on the last edits to the document on the WG Status Report.

1- Regarding the references to the two PROPOSALs ('Strengthened cooperation within the context of the IGF 2019' and ' Methodologies for the Development of Written IGF Outputs '), in point 2 and 6, under the 2019 IGF cycle heading, they follow the same structure:
The report PROPOSAL was reviewed by this WG and may be helpful to the MAG's deliberations

I would propose a clarification on the language, as in my first reading (and subsequent ones to more precisely asses the meaning) matching the term "reviewed by this WG" with "may be helpful" suggest proposals are supported by the WG, which I would say is not the case. In fact,  I understand Lynn has this same view as per his inclusion at the end of the document ("There was no WG consensus possible on these pilots this year ").

I would feel more comfortable with something along this lines " The report PROPOSAL was reviewed by this WG and though there was no consensus at the WG on the proposal, it may be helpful to the MAG's deliberations "

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."

3- In the last section of the paper Recommendations from this WG, point 4 recommending the both PROPOSALs to be considered for ideas, is repetitive with points 2 and 6 in section on 2019 IGF cycle. Aditionally, it does not make a reference there was not consensus on the proposals.

Considering the above, I suggest DELETING point 4

4- Having the statement " There was no WG consensus possible on these pilots this year " in the last paragraph of the document without the previous suggested modifications to my understanding is somehow vague. The impression that there is consensus on Proposals would have already been made in the section 2019 IGF cycle, and this does not provide much clarity.
I would propose to modify it:
For several reasons there was no WG consensus possible on these pilots ("Strengthened cooperation within the context of the IGF 2019", "Methodologies for the Development of Written IGF Outputs" and Synmind facilitaded process), but a number of members showed significant interest and hence should be included in this status report"



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.

In fact, at the recently celebrated Spanish IGF (https://igfspain.com/programa2018/), in the closing session discussing about the future of IGF in the context of the 10th Spain IGF anniversary, the IGF Secretariat mentioned ( and celebrated) the IGF is, as the way out to avoid becoming less relevant, heading to become an output oriented process where some policy recommendations are to be provided after some kind of "voting process" (and I quote the term voting process because these are the exact words used).

The Spanish IGF secretariat might not be that well informed, which I doubt because they are quite active in the IGF, but certainly that is the picture they are getting, what they are perceiving and communicating. And probably they are not the only ones.

In Spanish we have a saying that goes something like "when the river sounds, water it carries". Which I guess is the same as the English expression" there's no smoke without fire". I guess this is at least an indication that the concerns that many of us share about " IGF becoming some sort of negotiation or pseudo treaty body" are not unfounded.

As you say, I do neither want to convince anybody to share my views, but at least share with you what my concerns are and why.

Kind regards,

Gonzalo

Gonzalo Lopez-Barajas | Telefónica, S.A.
g.lopezbarajas at telefonica.com
Office: (+34) 91 482 88 10
Mobile: (+34) 629 59 24 48

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Wout de Natris <denatrisconsult at hotmail.nl>
Enviado el: martes, 6 de noviembre de 2018 17:50
Para: Lynn St.Amour <Lynn at Internet-Matters.org>; wg-mwp <wg-mwp at intgovforum.org>
Asunto: Re: [Wg-mwp] Fwd: WG-MWP: 2018 WG Status Report

Dear all,

Just to let you know I fully agree with Flavio's comments and with the suggestions made by Lynn.

The outline of this body of work has been to advice the MAG on:

  *   ways on how to agree on and provide focus for multiyear projects;
  *   ways how to agree on and organise pilots aimed at tangible and meaningful output through the IGF process;
  *   how to find more active support for and participation in these processes;
  *   all from a process and a practical point of view.

All suggestions hereto were made by active IGF participants. As such the work contains the opinions and concerns of representatives from all stakeholder communities and this is reflected in the summary document.

There is one concern that seems to remain and I can take away right here and now. This work is in no way aimed at changing the IGF into a some sort of negotiation or pseudo treaty body. Absolutely nobody I spoke to wants this to happen, it is not mentioned anywhere in the underlying documents, so is not a part of our work. What is, is outlined sufficiently in the 'Strengthened cooperation' document I was able to write with your and many others' input in the past 12 months, for which I thank you once again. This report is a collaborative effort and in itself shows what the IGF is capable of when minds are turned to a single topic and tapped.

At this point in time our WG can provide the MAG with several clear choices for work in the next cycle, which is of utmost importance to the future success of the IGF and should continue in 2019, at the earliest moment possible.

Best regards,

Wout


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - De Natris Consult

Kamerlingh Onnesstraat 43                                                        Tel: +31 648388813

2014 EK Haarlem                                                                          Skype: wout.de.natris

denatrisconsult at hotmail.nl<mailto:denatrisconsult at hotmail.nl>

http://www.denatrisconsult.nl

Blog http://woutdenatris.wordpress.com

________________________________
From: Lynn St.Amour <Lynn at Internet-Matters.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 3:34 PM
To: wg-mwp
Subject: [Wg-mwp] Fwd: WG-MWP: 2018 WG Status Report

Dear WG members,

please see the message below from Flávio,

Best,
Lynn

> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Flávio Rech Wagner <flavio at inf.ufrgs.br>
> Subject: Fwd: Re: [Wg-mwp] WG-MWP: 2018 WG Status Report
> Date: November 6, 2018 at 9:27:46 AM EST
> To: "Lynn St.Amour" <Lynn at internet-matters.org>
>
> Dear Lynn,
>
> For some unknown reason, my message below is not being forwarded to the list, even after different tentatives. I do not receive any error notification, but the message does not go through.
>
> Could you please forward it to the list? Sorry for bothering you.
> Best,
>
> Flávio
>
>
> -------- Mensagem encaminhada --------
> Assunto:      Re: [Wg-mwp] WG-MWP: 2018 WG Status Report
> Data: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 12:17:34 -0200
> De:   Flávio Rech Wagner <flavio at inf.ufrgs.br> <mailto:flavio at inf.ufrgs.br>
> Para: wg-mwp at intgovforum.org <mailto:wg-mwp at intgovforum.org>
>
> Dear Lynn
>
> Thank you very much for your effort in finding a reasonable language for the final report that accommodates the diverging view points. I support your final version.
> I do hope that, by way of either a CENB-like major intersessional work or another type of intersessional project, the IGF may achieve more tangible outcomes that are of interest to the wide community, attract new relevant players, and reinforce and even increase its relevance in the Internet Governance ecosystem. A multi-year chartering of intersessional work, including BPFs, would be very helpful in achieving these goals.
> I also hope that the new MAG will support the idea of the pilots that explore new modalities of outputs / recommendations. Decisions of the new MAG regarding these pilots and/or a new major intersessional project should be taken as soon as possible, preferably no later than the first face-to-face MAG meeting.
>
> Rechartering our WG for 2019 so that it continues its work towards a multi-year planning of the IGF seems essential to me and should be proposed to the new MAG in a rather clear way, as it seems very difficult for the MAG as a whole to make such discussion in depth, for very simple practical reasons.
> Best regards
>
> Flávio
>
>
> Em 11/5/2018 10:02 PM, Lynn St.Amour escreveu:
>> Dear colleagues,
>>
>> I have read through all the comments carefully and hopefully have found an acceptable way forward.  Apologies for the delay in turning this around, I have had to start and stop it several times.
>>
>> First,  thank you to everyone for the careful reviews and all the efforts over the past 5 or so months.   I began with the version submitted by Timea and incorporated comments and suggestions from all other submissions.
>>
>> I think there is a lot of similarity (or could be) between the major policy project - CENB and what some members were looking for wrt new multiyear strategic topic(s).  I think it is a good time for the MAG to review how well our collective efforts have worked with the major policy project as it has been 4 years, and  improvements are likely needed.  Some of the suggestions from WG members may be appropriate for future major policy projects.
>>
>> With respect to the two pilots that were reviewed in the WG - I believe those options are still open and a number of WG members want to continue exploring them.  They address modalities of working, of outreach and also exploring new modalities of outputs/recommendations.   The first step could be to get agreement on a topic or two and then determine how/if it might benefit from exploring these modalities.    One option is that we explore whether a new major policy initiative could be improved by following some of the suggestions in those pilots.   In any case, given there was interest in these ideas from a number of WG members, I attempted to capture the current state in the following bullet under Next Steps:   "The reports 'Strengthened cooperation within the context of the IGF 2019' and "Methodologies for the Development of Written IGF Outputs" provide additional ideas and may be helpful to the MAG in their deliberations."    I also added (last paragraph):  "There was no WG consensus possible on these pilots this year (for several reasons), but there was significant interest on the part of a number of members and hence should be included in this status report."
>>
>> One of the things we consistently hear is that a longer horizon wrt the topics the IGF will focus on would be helpful in outreach efforts and in bringing in additional donors.   We have also heard that BPFs would benefit from a multi-year chartering as there would be no downtime between outgoing and Incoming MAG decisions, and would result in a more efficient start-up.  A multi-year chartering would also provide the ability (and time) to reach out to other collaborators.  To that end, I added one bullet under Next Steps -- for the WGs consideration... "4) Review the possibility of adopting multi-year intersessional activities for some BPFs and/or a major policy initiative."  If WG members prefer to leave that out - no problem, we can pick it up with the MAG in the future.
>>
>> Just FYI, I am undecided as to whether or not I think the WG should continue, but this is a decision for the incoming MAG anyway.   This work is important enough and broad enough that it should be with the whole MAG (and this year, we expect to have more time to get through all that needs to be done).
>>
>> A few additional comments:
>>
>> Pradeep, you suggested capturing any "resolutions" made by the WG and calling them out separately.  I think this is a great idea going forward but as we did not declare them as such at the time, I do not feel we can call them out here.  We do try and indicate where the WG was in agreement.
>>
>> Also, you suggested including any challenges foreseen for this WG as part of the report to the MAG, and this is another good idea.  I believe some of this was done in some of the suggestions and extending this as part of any transition discussion between the incoming and outgoing MAG would be a good start.
>>
>> I made a few comments in response to other comments but the editing was acting up on me so they all say Author.  I indicated my comments by adding "Lynn:" at the beginning of them.
>>
>> Hope this report meets with your approval.  if we can get agreement in time we can report it as such on the MAG call this week, but I appreciate that may be difficult, in which case we will report it as a work in process.
>>
>> Note: need final copies of the reports 'Strengthened cooperation within the context of the IGF 2019' and "Methodologies for the Development of Written IGF Outputs" to include as an Annex and/or links.  Want to make sure I have the latest versions.
>>
>> Best,
>> Lynn
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 29, 2018, at 8:32 PM, Lynn St.Amour <lynn at internet-matters.org> <mailto:lynn at internet-matters.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Ben, all,
>>>
>>> a small group of WG members jumped in to help begin drafting a status report - it is still rough; and speaking for myself, I just ran out of cycles to help move it forward.  I am attaching it here.
>>>
>>> We would like the WG members to review the document, and help refine it.  Our goal is to have a status report that we could hand off to the incoming MAG/MAG Chair, preferably no later than 1 week from today.
>>>
>>> If necessary, we can identify the areas where there is agreement and areas where there are differing opinions - but we should capture the work and status.
>>>
>>> Appreciate anything WG members can contribute.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>>
>>> <WG-MWP 2018 - WORKING DRAFT Status Doc.docx>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Oct 29, 2018, at 12:04 PM, Ben Wallis (CELA) <bewallis at microsoft.com> <mailto:bewallis at microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Lynn
>>>>
>>>> During the last call, you mentioned some kind of Summary Paper covering the various outputs of this year, which I've been looking forward to review. Maybe that is referred to in item 3 below?
>>>>
>>>> Will that be circulated ahead of tomorrow's call?
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Ben
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Lynn St.Amour <Lynn at Internet-Matters.org>
>>>> <mailto:Lynn at Internet-Matters.org>
>>>> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 8:00 AM
>>>> To: wg-mwp <wg-mwp at intgovforum.org> <mailto:wg-mwp at intgovforum.org>
>>>> Subject: [Wg-mwp] WG-MWP: Webex meeting invitation & Draft Agenda -
>>>> October 30th, 2018 1500 -1600 UTC
>>>>
>>>> Dear WG members,
>>>>
>>>> please find below the log-in details for our next call - no registration required.
>>>>
>>>> Please see below the draft agenda - all comments/suggestions welcome.
>>>>
>>>> Siva, is there anything you would like to add to the agenda?
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Lynn
>>>>
>>>> -----------------
>>>> DRAFT AGENDA:
>>>>
>>>> 1 - Intro/Logistics/Admin
>>>>
>>>> 2 - Status of the following proposals:
>>>>
>>>> a)  "IGF Programme Framework"
>>>> b)  Option Paper on Methodologies for the Development of Written
>>>> IGF Outputs
>>>> c)  Strengthening Cooperation within the Context of the IGF: A
>>>> Roadmap for 2018
>>>>
>>>> 3 -  Review status of concrete proposal for the development of a
>>>> multi-year strategic work programme
>>>>
>>>> 4 -  Update on WG-Improvements (WG-IMP) as their work relates to
>>>> this WG
>>>>
>>>> 5 - Next steps/future agenda items
>>>>
>>>> 6 - AOB
>>>>
>>>> -----------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> WG-MWP 2018
>>>> Tuesday, October 30, 2018
>>>> 3:00 pm  |  Greenwich Time (Reykjavik, GMT)  |  1 hr Meeting number
>>>> (access code): 841 545 027
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Add to Calendar
>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi
>>>> ntgovforum.webex.com%2Fintgovforum%2Fj.php%3FMTID%3Dm62b6ef28964f91
>>>> 427b2b06f4c7a10a19&data=02%7C01%7Cbewallis%40microsoft.com%7Cc0
>>>> ce0c2e4f3d4aa1521c08d63daf5291%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7
>>>> C1%7C0%7C636764220546393583&sdata=JQz3%2BdqmC9wyFn0TrbmXIlOlTva
>>>> kMLKjCf2jh8xXfqc%3D&reserved=0>
>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi
>>>> ntgovforum.webex.com%2Fintgovforum%2Fj.php%3FMTID%3Dm62b6ef28964f91
>>>> 427b2b06f4c7a10a19&data=02%7C01%7Cbewallis%40microsoft.com%7Cc0
>>>> ce0c2e4f3d4aa1521c08d63daf5291%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7
>>>> C1%7C0%7C636764220546393583&sdata=JQz3%2BdqmC9wyFn0TrbmXIlOlTva
>>>> kMLKjCf2jh8xXfqc%3D&reserved=0>
>>>> When it's time, join the meeting <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fintgovforum.webex.com%2Fintgovforum%2Fj.php%3FMTID%3Dm89fddc13474755fde69f5d00ebd20b6d&data=02%7C01%7Cbewallis%40microsoft.com%7Cc0ce0c2e4f3d4aa1521c08d63daf5291%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636764220546393583&sdata=9CfEpXpYXNJs95sHJPWozSgSG2VEPr5CzkUV%2BB7f4tE%3D&reserved=0> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fintgovforum.webex.com%2Fintgovforum%2Fj.php%3FMTID%3Dm89fddc13474755fde69f5d00ebd20b6d&data=02%7C01%7Cbewallis%40microsoft.com%7Cc0ce0c2e4f3d4aa1521c08d63daf5291%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636764220546393583&sdata=9CfEpXpYXNJs95sHJPWozSgSG2VEPr5CzkUV%2BB7f4tE%3D&reserved=0>.
>>>>
>>>> Join by phone
>>>> +44-203-478-5289 <tel:+44-203-478-5289,,*01*841545027%23%23*01*>
>>>> +<tel:+44-203-478-5289,,*01*841545027%23%23*01*> Call-in toll
>>>> +number (UK)
>>>>
>>>> Can't join the meeting?
>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fc
>>>> ollaborationhelp.cisco.com%2Farticle%2FWBX000029055&data=02%7C0
>>>> 1%7Cbewallis%40microsoft.com%7Cc0ce0c2e4f3d4aa1521c08d63daf5291%7C7
>>>> 2f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636764220546393583&sd
>>>> ata=Z5%2BBwMos%2Bx1%2FJa3aqEGmNHT56rNohx0sSocjdi477Dc%3D&reserv
>>>> ed=0>
>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fc
>>>> ollaborationhelp.cisco.com%2Farticle%2FWBX000029055&data=02%7C0
>>>> 1%7Cbewallis%40microsoft.com%7Cc0ce0c2e4f3d4aa1521c08d63daf5291%7C7
>>>> 2f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636764220546393583&sd
>>>> ata=Z5%2BBwMos%2Bx1%2FJa3aqEGmNHT56rNohx0sSocjdi477Dc%3D&reserv
>>>> ed=0>
>>>>
>>>> IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please note that this Webex service allows audio and other information sent during the session to be recorded, which may be discoverable in a legal matter. By joining this session, you automatically consent to such recordings. If you do not consent to being recorded, discuss your concerns with the host or do not join the session.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wg-mwp mailing list
>>>> Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org <mailto:Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org> To
>>>> unsubscribe or manage your options please go to
>>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fint
>>>> govforum.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fwg-mwp_intgovforum.org&data
>>>> =02%7C01%7Cbewallis%40microsoft.com%7Cc0ce0c2e4f3d4aa1521c08d63daf5
>>>> 291%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636764220546393583
>>>> &sdata=06wuKYhYJy9gyYrqWK4qRDSDMyq0K%2FehpHa2rY6s%2BmQ%3D&r
>>>> eserved=0
>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fin
>>>> tgovforum.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fwg-mwp_intgovforum.org&dat
>>>> a=02%7C01%7Cbewallis%40microsoft.com%7Cc0ce0c2e4f3d4aa1521c08d63daf
>>>> 5291%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63676422054639358
>>>> 3&sdata=06wuKYhYJy9gyYrqWK4qRDSDMyq0K%2FehpHa2rY6s%2BmQ%3D&
>>>> reserved=0> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wg-mwp mailing list
>>>> Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org <mailto:Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org> To
>>>> unsubscribe or manage your options please go to
>>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org
>>>> <http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wg-mwp mailing list
>>> Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org <mailto:Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org> To
>>> unsubscribe or manage your options please go to
>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org
>>> <http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wg-mwp mailing list
>> Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org <mailto:Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org> To unsubscribe
>> or manage your options please go to
>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org
>> <http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org>
>
> --
> Prof. Flávio Rech Wagner
>
> Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul      flavio at inf.ufrgs.br <mailto:flavio at inf.ufrgs.br>
> Instituto de Informática                       Fone: +55-51-3308 9494
> Porto Alegre, Brasil                           http://www.inf.ufrgs.br/~flavio <http://www.inf.ufrgs.br/%7Eflavio>
>
> Diretor-Presidente da Internet Society Brasil
> flavio at inf.ufrgs.br <mailto:flavio at inf.ufrgs.br>, info at isoc.org.br <mailto:info at isoc.org.br>          Fone: +55-51-3308 9494
> https://www.isoc.org.br <https://www.isoc.org.br/>                        Twitter: @ISOCBrasil
> https://www.facebook.com/isocbrasil/ <https://www.facebook.com/isocbrasil/>           https://www.youtube.com/isocbrasil <https://www.youtube.com/isocbrasil>
>

_______________________________________________
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

________________________________

Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.

The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it.

Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição




More information about the Wg-mwp mailing list