Hi Thanks Shane. I’m familiar with the rule. We don’t use it in the IGF, for various reasons, at least not since the early tense days of the MAG. Bill > On Jun 3, 2016, at 12:13, Shane Kerr <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > William, > > At 2016-06-03 11:13:55 +0200 > William Drake <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >>> On Jun 3, 2016, at 02:06, avri doria <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>> >>> Chatham House style (content w/o attribution) >> >> In true bottom up transparent community driven IGF fashion….not. > > To be honest, that doesn't seem too horrible. The Chatham House rule is > there for a reason: > > Q. What are the benefits of using the Rule? > > A. It allows people to speak as individuals, and to express views > that may not be those of their organizations, and therefore it > encourages free discussion. People usually feel more relaxed if > they don't have to worry about their reputation or the implications > if they are publicly quoted. > > https://www.chathamhouse.org/about/chatham-house-rule > > Cheers, > > -- > Shane - speaking only for myself ;) ************************************************************* William J. Drake International Fellow & Lecturer Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ University of Zurich, Switzerland [log in to unmask] (direct), [log in to unmask] (lists), www.williamdrake.org The Working Group on Internet Governance - 10th Anniversary Reflections New book at http://amzn.to/22hWZxC *************************************************************