[Wg-mwp] Fwd: [NRIs List] [DC] IGF multi-year work programme

Lynn St. Amour lynn at internet-matters.org
Sat Apr 6 17:15:01 EDT 2019


Thank you Susan,  very clear and very helpful. 

And thank you to Siva for his earlier note. 

I encourage both of you to post a message to the NRI and the DC lists.   It would indeed be unfortunate if this affected the upcoming MAG meeting given it seems to stem from a misunderstanding and/or lack of adequate description. And, we should clarify where necessary (the graphic and/or the process). 

Best, Lynn

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 6, 2019, at 16:39, Chalmers, Susan <SChalmers at ntia.gov> wrote:
> 
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> Neither the WG-MWP nor the MAG has discussed, or considered, having oversight of or "micromanaging" the substantive work of of NRIs and DCs. That is a misinterpretation of the document cited, and it is concerning that the discussion here, based upon that misinterpretation, is having a negative impact on the community.  On the eve of our second open meeting and consultation, we should work towards resolution of this issue.
> 
> The MAG has in past years deliberated programmatic aspects for the IGF event, as is its function, dealing with - for example - the time allocated to the sessions and whether sessions should be main sessions or other types of sessions (e.g. collaborative sessions).  
> 
> Clarification is needed.  The document cited was a working document that was never envisioned to be posted, and to this extent I fully support Professor Flávio's suggestion below about process.  At the same time, as it was not intended to be posted as a final document, I think it is okay to unpublish it or otherwise qualify it as a work-in-progress.
> 
> What did go through proper discussion and agreement was posting the work product emanated from the original document.  https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/community-feedback-questionnaire-on-the-draft-igf-programme-framework-chart
> Community Feedback questionnaire on the draft IGF Programme Framework chart | Internet Governance Forum - intgovforum.org
> www.intgovforum.org
> The IGF is a global multistakeholder platform that facilitates the discussion of public policy issues pertaining to the Internet
> Folks should have the chance to understand that the entire point behind the work, on which I collaborated with fellow MAG colleague, Timea Suto, was to map out the IGF process from a "bird's eye point of view" in the interest of greater transparency, and to assist all of the IGF community in understanding how to best participate in the IGF process. 
> 
> The WG received just a handful of comments on the document, and given the cycle of the IGF, the programme framework chart was never re-addressed.  In fact, given the new approach to focusing the IGF programme on three themes the document should be revised and revisited in light of the process taken at the first meeting - in an open process with the IGF community (as was the process before).
> 
> Contrary to what some have suggested on this list, again, the MAG is not focused on diminishing the work of the DCs or the NRIs.  The work by these constituent parts of the IGF community is rife with value and makes the IGF the unique and wonderful event that it is. 
> 
> Sincerely,
> Susan 
> 
> 
> From: Flávio Rech Wagner <flavio at inf.ufrgs.br>
> Sent: Friday, April 5, 2019 4:53 PM
> To: wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
> Subject: Re: [Wg-mwp] Fwd: [NRIs List] [DC] IGF multi-year work programme
>  
> Dear Lynn and colleagues
> 
> Your previous response to Lorena and Luca, as well as Siva's response to 
> Marilyn, should have been sufficient to make it clear that there is a 
> huge misunderstanding in the interpretation of the graphic and that the 
> WG-MWP is not proposing to give to the MAG any oversight over the work 
> of NRIs and DCs.
> 
> I do not agree with Marilyn's suggestion regarding a withdrawal of the 
> graphic. This would be an exaggerated solution to a simple issue.
> 
> Nevertheless, I think we can reduce negative reactions to the graphic 
> (even if caused by a misunderstanding of its meaning) if we agree to 
> replace "MAG approval process" with another language. Another solution 
> would be to complement the graphic with a more detailed explanation of 
> the "MAG approval process", clearly stating that NRIs and DCs are 
> autonomous in their internal works.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Flávio
> 
> 
> 
> > Dear WG members,
> >
> > would very much like to hear from WG members on the graphic and specifically on Marilyn’s suggestion.
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> >
> > Lynn
> >
> >> Begin forwarded message:
> >>
> >> From: Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [NRIs List] [DC] IGF multi-year work programme
> >> Date: April 5, 2019 at 8:14:05 AM EDT
> >> To: Lynn St.Amour <Lynn at internet-matters.org>
> >> Cc: "Igfregionals at intgovforum.org" <igfregionals at intgovforum.org>, "B at lucabelli.net" <LB at lucabelli.net>, lorena jaume <ljaume at hotmail.com>
> >>
> >> I appreciate seeing the Chair's response.  It is welcomed.
> >>
> >> I especially appreciated Luca's and Lorena's earlier posts.
> >>
> >> I think the concern about the graphic is well placed and well founded.
> >>
> >> In looking at the graphic which was published by a WG chaired by the IGF Chair, I am disappointed that it found its way into being "reported out".  Images have a way of conveying information that can be "misconveying".
> >> This one seems to be an example. However, it "lives" on, so it continues to misconvey.
> >>
> >> I appreciate that the Chair of MAG suggests that it is not intended.
> >>
> >> I find myself very challenged to understand why it has not been withdrawn already, if it has erroneous information.  It doesn't say DRAFT, or to be approved. It is entitled:IGF-WG-MWP PROPOSAL: MULTI YEAR FRAMEWORK FOR IGF.  This label makes it look like it is approved by this WG.
> >>
> >> ISSUES WITH THE GRAPHIC FROM MY PERSPECTIVE RE THE NRIS:
> >> It clearly shows the DCs and NRIs being "approved" by the MAG approval process at second meeting.
> >> As it presently stands, it seems to convey an approval process by the MAG.
> >> The "shadow" circle also identifies the need for a process for allocation of DC and NRI sessions.
> >>
> >> It seems to me,  if the MAG and Chair want to show full recognition of the organic nature of the DCs and NRIs. a better choice of language is needed. ... something more like "collaborative efforts with DCs and NRIs".
> >>
> >> Rather than MAG approval process.. showing the NRIs and DCs being reviewed by the MAG.
> >>
> >> So,I have a concrete suggestion.  Let's fix this.  The WG and MAG Chair can simply withdraw the graphic. Formally. The link should not continue to have a document that is according to the Chair, not the formal perspective. It needs to say: withdrawn/not approved, or something of that nature so that it is not continuing to be available as what seems to be an approved recommendation from a WG chaired by the MAG chair.
> >>
> >> I do not speak for any others, but I do understand clearly how powerful a graphic can be in how it conveys information -- or misinformation.
> >>
> >> Simple solution: noted above.
> >>
> >> And, again, welcome the Chair's comments. Now time for a solution and continued acceptance of the organic and dynamic nature of the NRIs -- recognizing the presence is indeed one of the best outcomes of WSIS.
> >>
> >> Marilyn Cade
> >> From: Barrack Otieno <otieno.barrack at gmail.com <mailto:otieno.barrack at gmail.com>>
> >> Sent: Friday, April 5, 2019 1:07 AM
> >> To: Lynn St.Amour
> >> Cc: Igfregionals at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfregionals at intgovforum.org>; B at lucabelli.net <mailto:B at lucabelli.net>
> >> Subject: Re: [NRIs List] [DC] IGF multi-year work programme
> >>   
> >> Thanks for  the clarification Lynn,
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> On 4/4/19, Lynn St.Amour <Lynn at internet-matters.org <mailto:Lynn at internet-matters.org>> wrote:
> >>> Dear Lorena, Luca,
> >>>
> >>> there is a serious misunderstanding here.   The MAG is NOT “recommending the
> >>> MAG have oversight over the work of the NRIs and the DCs”,  nor was the
> >>> Working Group: Multiyear Strategic Work Plan recommending this!   Nor is
> >>> there a discussion on the MAG re “the MAG having oversight over the NRIs”.
> >>>
> >>> The MAG and the WG-MWP fully respect the roles and the autonomy of the NRIs
> >>> and DCs, and I believe have been working diligently to support the NRIs and
> >>> DCs - all in our respective capacities and roles.
> >>>
> >>> As an aid for the community and the MAG, the WG and the Secretariat compiled
> >>> a table several years ago (a "Component document" that included all the
> >>> component pieces of the IGF ecosystem with all their reference documents
> >>> included).  That can be found here:
> >>> https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.intgovforum.org%2Fmultilingual%2Findex.php%3Fq%3Dfiledepot_download%2F6212%2F1241&data=02%7C01%7CSChalmers%40ntia.gov%7C014027a7d2a049e6d26c08d6ba086102%7Cd6cff1bd67dd4ce8945dd07dc775672f%7C0%7C0%7C636900942505003564&sdata=u5wWRvtP%2Fl8ctGK3wmG7FFvEz7n9vYdOwhujWJuWEdQ%3D&reserved=0 <https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.intgovforum.org%2Fmultilingual%2Findex.php%3Fq%3Dfiledepot_download%2F6212%2F1241&data=02%7C01%7CSChalmers%40ntia.gov%7C014027a7d2a049e6d26c08d6ba086102%7Cd6cff1bd67dd4ce8945dd07dc775672f%7C0%7C0%7C636900942505013572&sdata=tTyYZeir0cPyRrsiA1lyzPfdcenCW0DDuOnCOgbhDis%3D&reserved=0>
> >>>    Please note: this is the reference document, not the graphic you mention
> >>> below.
> >>>
> >>> As the Chair of that WG last year, I will forward this note to the WG asking
> >>> for further comments/clarifications.   Just FYI: the WG did not request to
> >>> be rechartered for 2019.
> >>>
> >>> Hope this helps clear up the misunderstanding.  If not, please let us know.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> We are all working towards the same objective, and a dialogue is much more
> >>> productive for all.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>>
> >>> Lynn
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Apr 3, 2019, at 6:45 PM, lorena jaume <ljaume at hotmail.com <mailto:ljaume at hotmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Dear all,
> >>>> as we discussed in our last call, a working group within the MAG is
> >>>> recommending the MAG to have oversight over the work of the NRIs and the
> >>>> DCs. This would mean that the NRI network would not be autonomous anymore
> >>>> and that our collaborative with the secretariat would not be anymore.
> >>>> Afaik this is a decision that procedurally cannot be taken by the MAG,
> >>>> since they don't have the competence. So even though the MAG wants to
> >>>> discuss the idea of having oversight over the NRIs does not mean that they
> >>>> can have oversight. I am forwarding you an email (see below) from the
> >>>> mailinglist of the Dynamic Coalitions. Luca Belli is suggesting to send a
> >>>> statement to the MAG. From our last call I take that the majority in the
> >>>> call had a similar position. Would a joint statement make sense?
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Lorena
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Am 03.04.19, 19:13 schrieb "LB at lucabelli.net <mailto:LB at lucabelli.net>" <LB at lucabelli.net <mailto:LB at lucabelli.net>>:
> >>>>
> >>>>     Dear Eleonora and all,
> >>>>
> >>>>      Many thanks for sharing these documents.
> >>>>
> >>>>      I am baffled by the MAG's vision of the IGF "Ecosystem Overview"
> >>>> provided in the second document you shared
> >>>>      https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.intgovforum.org%2Fmultilingual%2Ffiledepot_download%2F5075%2F1259&data=02%7C01%7CSChalmers%40ntia.gov%7C014027a7d2a049e6d26c08d6ba086102%7Cd6cff1bd67dd4ce8945dd07dc775672f%7C0%7C0%7C636900942505013572&sdata=jz39X8R%2Fq7M%2Bz1iMvtrNk9oiWCAvoxP8VxSBw8D48v8%3D&reserved=0 <https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.intgovforum.org%2Fmultilingual%2Ffiledepot_download%2F5075%2F1259&data=02%7C01%7CSChalmers%40ntia.gov%7C014027a7d2a049e6d26c08d6ba086102%7Cd6cff1bd67dd4ce8945dd07dc775672f%7C0%7C0%7C636900942505013572&sdata=jz39X8R%2Fq7M%2Bz1iMvtrNk9oiWCAvoxP8VxSBw8D48v8%3D&reserved=0>
> >>>> (*Working Group presentation)
> >>>>
> >>>>      At page 1, the graphic proposed by the MAG explicitly mentions "MAG
> >>>> approval" i.e. MAG control over DCs and NRIs work, which of course would
> >>>> be a self-attribution of non-existing MAG powers concerning what can be
> >>>> done by DCs and NRIs.
> >>>>
> >>>>      Needless to remind that the MAG is a programme committee that has all
> >>>> the rights to assess that formal requirements are respected by DCs (as
> >>>> they are doing when they ask us to submit session request via specific
> >>>> forms) and NRIs but has NO right at all to approve the type or content of
> >>>> the work DCs and NRIs decide to do.
> >>>>
> >>>>      And, of course, needless to say that this continuous underhand
> >>>> attempts from the MAG to assert control over DCs and NRIs are not really
> >>>> the best possible strategy to restore trust between us….
> >>>>
> >>>>      I think both DCs and NRIs should carefully check these sort of sneaky
> >>>> attempts to control WHAT we do and STRONGLY oppose it.
> >>>>
> >>>>      I am writing in the hope we jointly agree to send a shared and robust
> >>>> message opposing this very peculiar MAG “overview”
> >>>>
> >>>>      Best
> >>>>      Luca
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>     Luca Belli, PhD
> >>>>     Professor of Internet Governance and Regulation, FGV Rio de Janeiro Law
> >>>> School
> >>>>     Chercheur Associé, Centre de Droit Public Comparé,
> >>>> Université Paris 2
> >>>>
> >>>>     https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.internet-governance.fgv.br&data=02%7C01%7CSChalmers%40ntia.gov%7C014027a7d2a049e6d26c08d6ba086102%7Cd6cff1bd67dd4ce8945dd07dc775672f%7C0%7C0%7C636900942505013572&sdata=DyK9wrl2Vc4yKZjv9ov0YpX%2Blc1hDz2lvMA7avI9gyI%3D&reserved=0 <https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.internet-governance.fgv.br&data=02%7C01%7CSChalmers%40ntia.gov%7C014027a7d2a049e6d26c08d6ba086102%7Cd6cff1bd67dd4ce8945dd07dc775672f%7C0%7C0%7C636900942505023586&sdata=hnqj4qSlUzuxp1zgLxbul1KfcRwWQGO8eje6Xj%2BGzPU%3D&reserved=0>
> >>>>     @1lucabelli
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> -- 
> Prof. Flávio Rech Wagner                
> 
> Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul      flavio at inf.ufrgs.br
> Instituto de Informática                       Fone: +55-51-3308 9494
> Porto Alegre, Brasil                           https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http:%2F%2Fwww.inf.ufrgs.br%2F~flavio&data=02%7C01%7CSChalmers%40ntia.gov%7C014027a7d2a049e6d26c08d6ba086102%7Cd6cff1bd67dd4ce8945dd07dc775672f%7C0%7C0%7C636900942505023586&sdata=Ejemb%2Bbi2%2BS3F3K9htsgHRhtbRzkXXicgpZkuZgtjjU%3D&reserved=0
> 
> Presidente da Internet Society Brasil
> flavio at inf.ufrgs.br, info at isoc.org.br          Fone: +55-51-3308 9494
> https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.isoc.org.br&data=02%7C01%7CSChalmers%40ntia.gov%7C014027a7d2a049e6d26c08d6ba086102%7Cd6cff1bd67dd4ce8945dd07dc775672f%7C0%7C0%7C636900942505023586&sdata=PydUsC8Vrtsa2LYoDniJ%2B%2ByzJ63Qylse7ucSxQXNgUs%3D&reserved=0                         Twitter: @ISOCBrasil
> https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fisocbrasil%2F&data=02%7C01%7CSChalmers%40ntia.gov%7C014027a7d2a049e6d26c08d6ba086102%7Cd6cff1bd67dd4ce8945dd07dc775672f%7C0%7C0%7C636900942505023586&sdata=D1rnHYl%2FU93WFibY1Ekx1aHawObZWswIAKOTniaRiFs%3D&reserved=0           https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fisocbrasil&data=02%7C01%7CSChalmers%40ntia.gov%7C014027a7d2a049e6d26c08d6ba086102%7Cd6cff1bd67dd4ce8945dd07dc775672f%7C0%7C0%7C636900942505023586&sdata=S5AI5Td0bqjsZdTSF3qpbBWI13pn6W4S59ofI6329Nc%3D&reserved=0
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wg-mwp mailing list
> Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
> To unsubscribe or manage your options please go to https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fintgovforum.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fwg-mwp_intgovforum.org&data=02%7C01%7CSChalmers%40ntia.gov%7C014027a7d2a049e6d26c08d6ba086102%7Cd6cff1bd67dd4ce8945dd07dc775672f%7C0%7C0%7C636900942505033588&sdata=B9LoFqa7jfuHqXOZr3rmPHRwsxCveMN8ngF%2FIKLWgks%3D&reserved=0
> As of March 18, 2019, all NTIA email addresses will change to username at ntia.gov



More information about the Wg-mwp mailing list