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

Wout de Natris denatrisconsult at hotmail.nl
Tue Nov 6 17:58:17 EST 2018

Dear all,

I must agree with Jeremy that there is no agreement or disagreement. There are simply proposals and options to be put before the MAG. Nothing more, nothing less, exactly as we were (t)asked to do.



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
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>


Blog http://woutdenatris.wordpress.com

From: Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at malcolm.id.au>
Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2018 8:07 PM
To: wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
Subject: Re: [Wg-mwp] Fwd: WG-MWP: 2018 WG Status Report

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

More information about the Wg-mwp mailing list