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

sivasubramanian muthusamy 6.internet at gmail.com
Sat Apr 6 18:18:53 EDT 2019


Dear Lynn,

I have posted a message on the DC list, but am not subscribed to the NRI
list. Would be helpful if someone could repost/ forward the message to the
NRI list.

Thank you.

Sivasubramanian M <https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy>



On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 2:45 AM Lynn St. Amour <lynn at internet-matters.org>
wrote:

> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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