[Wg-mwp] [Ext] Re: WG-MWP: 2018 WG Status Report: (was: Webex meeting invitation & Draft Agenda - October 30th, 2018 1500 -1600 UTC)

Veni Markovski veni.markovski at icann.org
Mon Jan 14 16:09:41 EST 2019


Lynn and all,

Further to the comments in the files received so far.

First - thank you, and thanks to all people in the working group, who contributed time and efforts to create the document!



The works we do is a lot, and I keep on reminding to everyone outside of the MAG that we are not a replacement for the WSIS or the UN General Assembly (UNGA), which discussed and passed the WSIS+10 Outcome document<http://workspace.unpan.org/sites/Internet/Documents/UNPAN96078.pdf>. What we are all trying to do, is improve the IGF – to the extent possible. We cannot change what the IGF is, only the UNGA can do it. We can only try to make it better – and I think we are trying to do exactly that.



On the recommendations:



It was repeatedly stated that all members of the WG intended to fully support the Tunis Agenda (and did not support voting or steps to become a forum for negotiations).  Specifically, several members (from different stakeholder groups) expressed the hope that the MAG will support the idea of new modalities of outputs / recommendations, perhaps via a small number of pilots.



I think this should be said in a different way, perhaps like this:

All members of the WG fully support the Tunis Agenda and the WSIS+10 Outcome Document.  No members supported the idea of voting or steps for the IGF to become a forum for negotiations, as the implementation of such ideas are beyond the scope of the MAG, and within the hands of the United Nations General Assembly.



Please, note, this also does not sound like a “recommendation”, it’s just describing the facts – that we work in the context of several WSIS documents and one from the UNGA.



Best,

Veni









-----Original Message-----
From: Lynn St.Amour <Lynn at Internet-Matters.org>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 08:26
To: Jutta Croll <jcroll at digitale-chancen.de>
Cc: wg-mwp <wg-mwp at intgovforum.org>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [Wg-mwp] WG-MWP: 2018 WG Status Report: (was: Webex meeting invitation & Draft Agenda - October 30th, 2018 1500 -1600 UTC)



Dear Jutta, Ben, all,



Thank you.  I tried to address the reasons why we were not able to reach consensus in the paragraphs 2 and 3 under Recommendations (below for ease).



2)     Throughout this process, there has been a recurring issue with respect to how far to go with producing more tangible outputs.  Some members believe there is support in the Tunis Agenda for “recommendations”, perhaps achieved through various ‘deliberative democratic methodologies that do not require text negotiations or voting, while still delivering outputs’.  It was repeatedly stated that all members of the WG intended to fully support the Tunis Agenda (and did not support voting or steps to become a forum for negotiations).  Specifically, several members (from different stakeholder groups) expressed the hope that the MAG will support the idea of new modalities of outputs / recommendations, perhaps via a small number of pilots.



3)      Late in the year, some members of the WG proposed the MAG explore the possibility of using a professionally facilitated process in 2019 and discussed an offer from a company called Synmind to provide an online/offline facilitated process for the IGF community. There was no consensus on proceeding and some members recognized this was a discussion/decision for the incoming MAG.



I believe paragraph 2) above captures the main point of disagreement.  Perhaps I could move this text up in the document, would that help?  We are meant to review this status report on Wednesday’s MAG call. And, of course WG members can provide additional comments during the status report itself.



The statements declaring we were not able to reach consensus were in the report from late last year and there were no additional explanations requested then.    If we include objections, I feel we need to also include reasons supporting the pilots and we are out of time for this report.  It could serve as the basis for the kick-off discussion with the MAG during our face-2-face.



Additional comments below.



> On Jan 14, 2019, at 12:50 AM, Jutta Croll <jcroll at digitale-chancen.de<mailto:jcroll at digitale-chancen.de>> wrote:

>

> Dear Lynn,

>


More information about the Wg-mwp mailing list