Hi,
I do not recall if/when we decided to start calling them working groups
and do not recall an extended (if any) conversation on the topic, we
just are calling them that. There may have been a moment when we where
using names awkwardly and just decided they were 'working groups or
whatever we called them,' eventually shortened to working groups. Sorry,
though, I do not remember an official moment, maybe some other MAG
participant remembers. Or you might just have to do the academic thing
and investigate the record for that particular thread. And who knows,
someone may notice it as you have done and complain, in which case we
can go back to 'wgs or whatever we call them.
I do not think Governments are participating that much qua governments
in the WGs, though some individuals are. Gov't MAG members are sitting
in the MAG listening and commenting on status reports from these groups.
Have not given it much thought, but could be said to be sitting in
oversight, though I am sure few would call it such.
avri
On 28-Aug-15 02:37, William Drake wrote:
> Hi Avri
>
> I’ve been too swamped of late to follow the MAG list and dig through
> my folder of saved IGF intersessional messages, so I wonder if you
> could just clarify something for me: when and how did the nomenclature
> "intersessional /BPF working groups" get accepted? You probably
> recall that back in 2005-2006 we (via the IG Caucus) were arguing for
> working groups, and at I think the very first open consultation when I
> got up and talked about forming these to work intersessionally on
> different topics of concern to developing country governments in a
> multistakeholder fashion, the Australian government rep (from John
> Howard’s regime) very sternly replied that WGs could not exist in IGF
> because it’s an intrinsically UN bureaucratic construct that would
> invariably yield horrors so we instead had to roll with ‘dynamic
> coalitions’ that most of those governments wouldn’t take seriously or
> join. Which of course helped to feed the G77 & China’s ten years of
> complaining that the IGF doesn’t “do anything” or yield “outcomes” of
> interest to them. But now we can say WG? Are they formulated any
> differently from DCs, or officially blessed? Are governments joining
> them?
>
> Thanks
>
> Bill
>
>> On Aug 27, 2015, at 4:53 PM, Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>> hi,
>>
>> I encourage people to read and get involved in commenting on the various
>> documents being posted by all of these groups. The 'working group'
>> activity with the IGF is growing and there are lots of opportunities to
>> contribute on all sorts of topics both in these fora and in the dynamic
>> coalitions. Planning groups for most of the sessions are also open for
>> participation.
>>
>> I will be attending the MAG meeting in Paris*. Let me know if you need
>> anything or if the remote particpation isn't working for you, I can at
>> least pass messages on.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> * Self funded through using miles and staying at a friend's apartment as
>> well as a measure of deficit financing.
>>
>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject: [Bp_multistakeholder] IGF Best Practices - OC and MAG meeting
>> next week
>> Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 14:35:19 +0000
>> From: Constance Bommelaer <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> To: MAG-public <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>,
>> [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> CC: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
>> <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
>> <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
>> <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
>> <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
>> <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>>
>> As part of next week's OC and MAG meeting
>> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/jevents/icalrepeat.detail/2015/09/02/284/-/igf-third-open-consultations-and-mag-meeting?Itemid=28&filter_reset=1#general-information>
>> in Paris (2-4 Sept.), coordinators and experts of the various IGF Best
>> Practices Forums
>> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/best-practice-forums>will be giving
>> updates on where their groups stand.
>>
>>
>> Over the past weeks, stakeholders have been working within virtual
>> groups on a number of issues. Within a few weeks, all draft outputs will
>> be ready and up for public comments on the IGF website. We expect to
>> have some of the drafts up for the MAG meeting next week. Following an
>> iterative process, the drafts will then evolve on the basis of comments
>> received, and finally be discussed at IGF Brazil, in November.
>>
>> IGF Best Practices Forums are open to all interested stakeholders.
>> To learn more about these initiatives and join the discussion, click on
>> the links below:
>>
>> 1. */Best Practices to Strengthen Multistakeholder Mechanisms/*
>> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/best-practice-forums/3-developing-meaningful-multistakeholder-participation-mechanisms>
>> 2. */Enabling Environments for Establishing Successful IXPs/*
>> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/best-practice-forums/6-enabling-environments-to-establish-successful-ixps>
>> 3. */Best Practices to counter Abuse Against Women Online/*
>> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/best-practice-forums/4-practices-to-countering-abuse-against-women-online>
>> 4. */Establishing and Supporting CSIRTs/*
>> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/best-practice-forums/2-establishing-and-supporting-csirts>
>> 5. */Best Practices to Regulate and Mitigate Spam/*
>> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/best-practice-forums/regulation-and-mitigation-of-unwanted-communications>
>> 6. */Creating an Enabling Environment for IPv6 Adoption/*
>> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/best-practice-forums/5-creating-an-enabling-environment-for-ipv6-adoption>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Participate remotely next week*
>>
>>
>> Below is the link to the agenda for next week's Open Consultation and
>> MAG meeting at UNESCO in Paris. In due time the links will be live for
>> accessing the meeting via remote participation, as well as the webcast
>> archives and transcripts, etc. - so as to allow you all to follow the
>> MAG and broader community discussions set to take place:
>>
>> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/jevents/icalrepeat.detail/2015/09/02/284/-/igf-third-open-consultations-and-mag-meeting?Itemid=28&filter_reset=1
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Constance Bommelaer
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>> <Attached Message Part.txt>
>
> *********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> International Fellow & Lecturer
> Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
> University of Zurich, Switzerland
> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency,
> ICANN, www.ncuc.org <http://www.ncuc.org>
> [log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> (direct), [log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> (lists),
> www.williamdrake.org <http://www.williamdrake.org>
> /Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap /http://goo.gl/sRR01q
> *********************************************************
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
|
