From igor at ostrowski.waw.pl  Fri Aug  1 04:21:33 2014
From: igor at ostrowski.waw.pl (Igor Ostrowski)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 10:21:33 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>

Subi,

apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:

Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland

Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding Internet governance and advocacy of the multistakeholder approach have been treated with top priority by the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.


It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:  Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl

Best
Igor


On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:

> Many thanks Igor.
> 
> Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
> 
> Collecting it for all the speakers.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Subi
> 
> 
> 
> On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
> >
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well 
> >
> > Best
> > Igor
> >
> >
> > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear All,
> >>
> >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
> >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
> >>
> >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out previously.
> >>
> >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
> >>
> >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
> >>
> >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
> >>
> >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy questions.
> >>
> >> Suggestions pertaining to :
> >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum time for participation and interventions from the floor and non facilitators. 
> >> 2. Format:
> >> A-no moderator
> >> B-4 moderators
> >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
> >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience interventions only
> >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
> >> D. An open space
> >>
> >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
> >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
> >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self nominations.  So we have them too.
> >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
> >>
> >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
> >>
> >> Any other inputs.
> >>
> >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
> >>
> >> We'll be updating the list soon.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Subi
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Igfmaglist mailing list
> >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> >> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> >
> >

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140801/5c1782f5/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  1 04:35:08 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 14:05:08 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
Message-ID: <CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.

regards

Subi


On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:

> Subi,
>
> apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>
> *Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland*
>
> *Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in European
> affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt with the
> implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda, including
> e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of
> Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues
> surrounding **Internet governance and advocacy of the **multistakeholder*
> *approach* *have been treated with top priority by the Polish government.
>  Active participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF
> Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.*
>
> It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:
> Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>
> Best
> Igor
>
>
> On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Many thanks Igor.
>
> Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>
> Collecting it for all the speakers.
>
> Regards
>
> Subi
>
>
> On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
> >
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of Administration
> and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well
> >
> > Best
> > Igor
> >
> >
> > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear All,
> >>
> >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
> >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their
> availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
> >>
> >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's
> participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out
> previously.
> >>
> >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and Markus
> have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from Constance,
> Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the
> call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross stakeholder
> groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
> >>
> >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
> >>
> >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
> >>
> >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy
> questions.
> >>
> >> Suggestions pertaining to :
> >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum time
> for participation and interventions from the floor and non facilitators.
> >> 2. Format:
> >> A-no moderator
> >> B-4 moderators
> >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then abt
> 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each of
> the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
> >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience
> interventions only
> >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
> >> D. An open space
> >>
> >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
> >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs have
> been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers
> can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
> >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self nominations.
> So we have them too.
> >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
> >>
> >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth
> volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to
> nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet
> values will have some.
> >>
> >> Any other inputs.
> >>
> >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact
> Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
> >>
> >> We'll be updating the list soon.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Subi
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Igfmaglist mailing list
> >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> >> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140801/47cd16e5/attachment.htm>

From wjdrake at gmail.com  Thu Aug  7 06:30:30 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 12:30:30 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>

Hi

I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...


Session title: As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc etc.

Descriptive text: what?s in the program paper seems dated.

Speakers/Moderators: [is the below still current?]


Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem*
	      [including per Janis the NM Initiative]

Moderator: TBD  

Panelists:

1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]

Panel 2: The Role of the IGF
 
1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]


Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now): 
Jeanette Hofmann (CS) 
Sam Dickinson (TC)

Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members for now): 

Government/IGO:
Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel 1?)
Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
Norberto Berner (Argentina)
Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
Larry Strickling (US)
Ed Vaizy (UK)
Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
Alice Munyua (AU)
Private Sector:
Danil Kerimi (WEF)
Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
Phil Rushton (BT)
Jimson Olufuye (WITSA) 
Technical Community:
Jari Arkko (IETF)
Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
Byron Holland (CIRA)
Geoff Huston (APNIC)
Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
Civil Society:
Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
Stephanie Perrin (UT)
Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
Marilia Maciel (FGV)
Adam Peake (Glocom)

Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?

Bill

On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
> 
> regards
> 
> Subi
> 
> 
> On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
> Subi,
> 
> apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
> 
> Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland
> 
> Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding Internet governance and advocacy of the multistakeholder approach have been treated with top priority by the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.
> 
> 
> It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:  Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
> 
> Best
> Igor
> 
> 
> On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Many thanks Igor.
>> 
>> Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>> 
>> Collecting it for all the speakers.
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> Subi
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>> >
>> > Dear All,
>> >
>> > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well 
>> >
>> > Best
>> > Igor
>> >
>> >
>> > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Dear All,
>> >>
>> >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>> >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>> >>
>> >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out previously.
>> >>
>> >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>> >>
>> >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>> >>
>> >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>> >>
>> >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy questions.
>> >>
>> >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>> >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum time for participation and interventions from the floor and non facilitators. 
>> >> 2. Format:
>> >> A-no moderator
>> >> B-4 moderators
>> >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>> >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience interventions only
>> >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>> >> D. An open space
>> >>
>> >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>> >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
>> >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self nominations.  So we have them too.
>> >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>> >>
>> >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>> >>
>> >> Any other inputs.
>> >>
>> >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>> >>
>> >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >>
>> >> Subi
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> >> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>> >
>> >

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140807/c6d62ec6/attachment.htm>

From FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov  Thu Aug  7 06:54:46 2014
From: FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov (Fiona Alexander)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 06:54:46 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution
	of	IG Ecosystem-Update
Message-ID: <kw287iq61mx23hnh0fwyta19.1407408884092@email.android.com>

I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.

-------- Original message --------
From: William Drake
Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: evolintgov2014
Cc: MAG-public
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

Hi

I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...


Session title: As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc etc.

Descriptive text: what?s in the program paper seems dated.

Speakers/Moderators: [is the below still current?]


Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem*
      [including per Janis the NM Initiative]

Moderator: TBD

Panelists:

1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]

Panel 2: The Role of the IGF

1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]


Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now):

 *   Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
 *   Sam Dickinson (TC)

Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members for now):

Government/IGO:

 *   Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
 *   Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel 1?)
 *   Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)

 *   Norberto Berner (Argentina)
 *   Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
 *   Larry Strickling (US)
 *   Ed Vaizy (UK)
 *   Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
 *   Alice Munyua (AU)

Private Sector:

 *   Danil Kerimi (WEF)
 *   Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
 *   Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
 *   Phil Rushton (BT)
 *   Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)

Technical Community:

 *   Jari Arkko (IETF)
 *   Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
 *   Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
 *   Byron Holland (CIRA)
 *   Geoff Huston (APNIC)
 *   Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)

Civil Society:

 *   Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
 *   Stephanie Perrin (UT)
 *   Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
 *   Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
 *   Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
 *   Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
 *   Marilia Maciel (FGV)
 *   Adam Peake (Glocom)

Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?

Bill

On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:


Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.

regards

Subi


On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
Subi,

apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:

Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland
Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding Internet governance and advocacy of the multistakeholder approach have been treated with top priority by the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.

It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:  Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl<mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>

Best
Igor


On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:


Many thanks Igor.

Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.

Collecting it for all the speakers.

Regards

Subi



On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well
>
> Best
> Igor
>
>
> On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>
>> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out previously.
>>
>> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>
>> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>>
>> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>
>> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy questions.
>>
>> Suggestions pertaining to :
>> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum time for participation and interventions from the floor and non facilitators.
>> 2. Format:
>> A-no moderator
>> B-4 moderators
>> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience interventions only
>> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>> D. An open space
>>
>> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
>> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self nominations.  So we have them too.
>> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>
>> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>>
>> Any other inputs.
>>
>> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>
>> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Subi
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140807/7f6d574a/attachment.htm>

From anriette at apc.org  Thu Aug  7 06:59:59 2014
From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 12:59:59 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org>

Dear all

I will send the updated 'setting scene' outline later today.  A few
comments here.

This is a very important panel, particularly now that the NETmundial
Initiative would have been launched just prior to the IGF.  So +1 to
Bills suggesting that NETmundial initiative is also covered. And this
panel is THE opportunity for discussing IGF strengthening, and the
longer term role the IGF has to play in the ecosystem.

Speakers need to be people that have an established history and
understanding of the IGF.

Anriette





On 07/08/2014 12:30, William Drake wrote:
> Hi
>
> I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this
> session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of
> all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.
>  The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then
> there?s been no collective discussion about options and who might be
> optimal on which panel. There have been a references to bilateral
> private conversations, a few requests by MAG members for speaking
> slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and
> a few confirmations that people invited previously have agreed to
> participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all previous main
> session planning groups I?ve participated in over the years worked in
> a more transparent and participatory way and got to consensus more
> quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It
> would be good if we could move this forward to a solid conclusion on a
> consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
>
>
> *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session:
> Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction
> to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we
> might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to
> cover everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM
> Initiative, etc etc.
>
> *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
>
> *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>
>
> *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>       [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>
> Moderator: TBD  
>
> Panelists:
>
> 1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
> 2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
> 3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>
> *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>  
> 1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
> 2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>
>
> Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now): 
>
>   * Jeanette Hofmann (CS) 
>   * Sam Dickinson (TC)
>
>
> Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members
> for now): 
>
> Government/IGO:
>
>   * Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>   * Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for
>     panel 1?)
>   * Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>
>   * Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>   * Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>   * Larry Strickling (US)
>   * Ed Vaizy (UK)
>   * Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>   * Alice Munyua (AU)
>
> Private Sector:
>
>   * Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>   * Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>   * Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>   * Phil Rushton (BT)
>   * Jimson Olufuye (WITSA) 
>
> Technical Community:
>
>   * Jari Arkko (IETF)
>   * Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>   * Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>   * Byron Holland (CIRA)
>   * Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>   * Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>
> Civil Society:
>
>   * Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>   * Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>   * Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>   * Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>   * Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>   * Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>   * Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>   * Adam Peake (Glocom)
>
>
> Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>
> Bill
>
> On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
> <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>>
>> Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Subi
>>
>>
>> On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
>> <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>
>>     Subi,
>>
>>     apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>
>>     /Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland///
>>
>>     /Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in
>>     European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where
>>     he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and European
>>     Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since
>>     November 2013, Minister of Administration and Digitalization.
>>      Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding //Internet governance
>>     and advocacy of the //multistakeholder/ /approach/ /have been
>>     treated with top priority by the Polish government.  Active
>>     participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF
>>     Polska are a few examples of his recent activities./
>>
>>
>>     It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:
>>      Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl <mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>
>>
>>     Best
>>     Igor
>>
>>
>>     On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>     <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>>     Many thanks Igor.
>>>
>>>     Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>
>>>     Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>
>>>     Regards
>>>
>>>     Subi
>>>
>>>
>>>     On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
>>>     <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>>     >
>>>     > Dear All,
>>>     >
>>>     > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of
>>>     Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability
>>>     as well 
>>>     >
>>>     > Best
>>>     > Igor
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>     > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>     <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>     >
>>>     >> Dear All,
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>>     >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed
>>>     their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-;
>>>     Technical Community.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your
>>>     organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails
>>>     which were sent out previously.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew
>>>     and Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive
>>>     inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others.
>>>     Not sure if Markus will be on the call today but we have a wide
>>>     pool of options from accross stakeholder groups and some names
>>>     for moderators to choose from.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several
>>>     emails.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and
>>>     policy questions.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>>     >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep
>>>     maximum time for participation and interventions from the floor
>>>     and non facilitators.
>>>     >> 2. Format:
>>>     >> A-no moderator
>>>     >> B-4 moderators
>>>     >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and
>>>     then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder
>>>     groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>>>     >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with
>>>     audience interventions only
>>>     >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>>     >> D. An open space
>>>     >>
>>>     >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>>     >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since
>>>     inputs have been received on session format the moratorium
>>>     imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be lifted to give
>>>     them enough notice to block their calenders)
>>>     >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self
>>>     nominations.  So we have them too.
>>>     >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with
>>>     youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would
>>>     they like to nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic
>>>     Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Any other inputs.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and
>>>     contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Regards
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Subi
>>>     >>
>>>     >> _______________________________________________
>>>     >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>>     >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>>>     >>
>>>     http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>>     >
>>>     >
>>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

-- 
`````````````````````````````````
anriette esterhuysen
executive director
association for progressive communications
po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
anriette at apc.org
www.apc.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140807/c01f8ce3/attachment.htm>

From avri at acm.org  Thu Aug  7 07:28:43 2014
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 07:28:43 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org>
Message-ID: <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>

Hi,

I agree with this.  I think this panel is one of the most important for
the future of the IGF itself.  There also needs to be a focus on
NETMundial so we can build on its momentum.

In terms of the name, I very strongly believe it should be:

"Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of
the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial"

I think the rest of the alphabet soup at the end of the title is
distracting.  Certainly we can include that in an overview, but it does
defoucus the session.  If anything extra, I would include the WG on IGF
improvements, as NETMundial and WGIGF are the two groups that have made
recommendations that have yet to be acted on by the IGF.  So maybe:

"Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of
the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial and WGIGF.

I must admit I do not understand yet how many people are still being
placed on the panels beyond those already committed.  One from each of
the major IGF SGs?

thanks

avri

On 07-Aug-14 06:59, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
> Dear all
> 
> I will send the updated 'setting scene' outline later today.  A few
> comments here.
> 
> This is a very important panel, particularly now that the NETmundial
> Initiative would have been launched just prior to the IGF.  So +1 to
> Bills suggesting that NETmundial initiative is also covered. And this
> panel is THE opportunity for discussing IGF strengthening, and the
> longer term role the IGF has to play in the ecosystem.
> 
> Speakers need to be people that have an established history and
> understanding of the IGF.
> 
> Anriette
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 07/08/2014 12:30, William Drake wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this
>> session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of
>> all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.
>>  The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then
>> there?s been no collective discussion about options and who might be
>> optimal on which panel. There have been a references to bilateral
>> private conversations, a few requests by MAG members for speaking
>> slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and
>> a few confirmations that people invited previously have agreed to
>> participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all previous main
>> session planning groups I?ve participated in over the years worked in
>> a more transparent and participatory way and got to consensus more
>> quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It
>> would be good if we could move this forward to a solid conclusion on a
>> consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
>>
>>
>> *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session:
>> Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction
>> to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we
>> might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to
>> cover everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM
>> Initiative, etc etc.
>>
>> *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
>>
>> *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>>
>>
>> *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>>       [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>>
>> Moderator: TBD  
>>
>> Panelists:
>>
>> 1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
>> 2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
>> 3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>>
>> *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>>  
>> 1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
>> 2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>>
>>
>> Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now): 
>>
>>   * Jeanette Hofmann (CS) 
>>   * Sam Dickinson (TC)
>>
>>
>> Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members
>> for now): 
>>
>> Government/IGO:
>>
>>   * Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>>   * Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for
>>     panel 1?)
>>   * Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>>
>>   * Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>>   * Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>>   * Larry Strickling (US)
>>   * Ed Vaizy (UK)
>>   * Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>>   * Alice Munyua (AU)
>>
>> Private Sector:
>>
>>   * Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>>   * Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>>   * Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>>   * Phil Rushton (BT)
>>   * Jimson Olufuye (WITSA) 
>>
>> Technical Community:
>>
>>   * Jari Arkko (IETF)
>>   * Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>>   * Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>>   * Byron Holland (CIRA)
>>   * Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>>   * Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>>
>> Civil Society:
>>
>>   * Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>>   * Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>>   * Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>>   * Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>>   * Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>>   * Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>>   * Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>>   * Adam Peake (Glocom)
>>
>>
>> Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>> <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>>>
>>> regards
>>>
>>> Subi
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
>>> <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     Subi,
>>>
>>>     apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>>
>>>     /Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland///
>>>
>>>     /Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in
>>>     European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where
>>>     he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and European
>>>     Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since
>>>     November 2013, Minister of Administration and Digitalization.
>>>      Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding //Internet governance
>>>     and advocacy of the //multistakeholder/ /approach/ /have been
>>>     treated with top priority by the Polish government.  Active
>>>     participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF
>>>     Polska are a few examples of his recent activities./
>>>
>>>
>>>     It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:
>>>      Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl <mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>
>>>
>>>     Best
>>>     Igor
>>>
>>>
>>>     On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>     <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>     Many thanks Igor.
>>>>
>>>>     Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>>
>>>>     Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>>
>>>>     Regards
>>>>
>>>>     Subi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
>>>>     <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>>>     >
>>>>     > Dear All,
>>>>     >
>>>>     > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of
>>>>     Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability
>>>>     as well 
>>>>     >
>>>>     > Best
>>>>     > Igor
>>>>     >
>>>>     >
>>>>     > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>>     <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>     >
>>>>     >> Dear All,
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>>>     >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed
>>>>     their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-;
>>>>     Technical Community.
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your
>>>>     organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails
>>>>     which were sent out previously.
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew
>>>>     and Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive
>>>>     inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others.
>>>>     Not sure if Markus will be on the call today but we have a wide
>>>>     pool of options from accross stakeholder groups and some names
>>>>     for moderators to choose from.
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several
>>>>     emails.
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and
>>>>     policy questions.
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>>>     >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep
>>>>     maximum time for participation and interventions from the floor
>>>>     and non facilitators.
>>>>     >> 2. Format:
>>>>     >> A-no moderator
>>>>     >> B-4 moderators
>>>>     >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and
>>>>     then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder
>>>>     groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>>>>     >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with
>>>>     audience interventions only
>>>>     >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>>>     >> D. An open space
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>>>     >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since
>>>>     inputs have been received on session format the moratorium
>>>>     imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be lifted to give
>>>>     them enough notice to block their calenders)
>>>>     >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self
>>>>     nominations.  So we have them too.
>>>>     >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with
>>>>     youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would
>>>>     they like to nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic
>>>>     Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> Any other inputs.
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and
>>>>     contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> Regards
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> Subi
>>>>     >>
>>>>     >> _______________________________________________
>>>>     >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>>>     >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>>>>     >>
>>>>     http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>>>     >
>>>>     >
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
> 
> -- 
> `````````````````````````````````
> anriette esterhuysen
> executive director
> association for progressive communications
> po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
> anriette at apc.org
> www.apc.org
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> 



From jeanette at wzb.eu  Thu Aug  7 07:34:22 2014
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 13:34:22 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org>
	<53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
Message-ID: <53E3643E.5090704@wzb.eu>

Hi, I fully support Avri's points.

I have stopped contributing to this list because I am confused about the 
decision making structure. Is it this list who decides on the direction 
and composition of this main session or are decisions made elsewhere? I 
so, by whom?

Jeanette

Am 07.08.2014 13:28, schrieb Avri Doria:
> Hi,
>
> I agree with this.  I think this panel is one of the most important for
> the future of the IGF itself.  There also needs to be a focus on
> NETMundial so we can build on its momentum.
>
> In terms of the name, I very strongly believe it should be:
>
> "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of
> the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial"
>
> I think the rest of the alphabet soup at the end of the title is
> distracting.  Certainly we can include that in an overview, but it does
> defoucus the session.  If anything extra, I would include the WG on IGF
> improvements, as NETMundial and WGIGF are the two groups that have made
> recommendations that have yet to be acted on by the IGF.  So maybe:
>
> "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of
> the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial and WGIGF.
>
> I must admit I do not understand yet how many people are still being
> placed on the panels beyond those already committed.  One from each of
> the major IGF SGs?
>
> thanks
>
> avri
>
> On 07-Aug-14 06:59, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
>> Dear all
>>
>> I will send the updated 'setting scene' outline later today.  A few
>> comments here.
>>
>> This is a very important panel, particularly now that the NETmundial
>> Initiative would have been launched just prior to the IGF.  So +1 to
>> Bills suggesting that NETmundial initiative is also covered. And this
>> panel is THE opportunity for discussing IGF strengthening, and the
>> longer term role the IGF has to play in the ecosystem.
>>
>> Speakers need to be people that have an established history and
>> understanding of the IGF.
>>
>> Anriette
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 07/08/2014 12:30, William Drake wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this
>>> session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of
>>> all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.
>>>   The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then
>>> there?s been no collective discussion about options and who might be
>>> optimal on which panel. There have been a references to bilateral
>>> private conversations, a few requests by MAG members for speaking
>>> slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and
>>> a few confirmations that people invited previously have agreed to
>>> participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all previous main
>>> session planning groups I?ve participated in over the years worked in
>>> a more transparent and participatory way and got to consensus more
>>> quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It
>>> would be good if we could move this forward to a solid conclusion on a
>>> consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
>>>
>>>
>>> *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session:
>>> Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction
>>> to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we
>>> might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to
>>> cover everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM
>>> Initiative, etc etc.
>>>
>>> *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
>>>
>>> *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>>>
>>>
>>> *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>>>        [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>>>
>>> Moderator: TBD
>>>
>>> Panelists:
>>>
>>> 1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
>>> 2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
>>> 3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>>>
>>> *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>>>
>>> 1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
>>> 2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>>>
>>>
>>> Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now):
>>>
>>>    * Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
>>>    * Sam Dickinson (TC)
>>>
>>>
>>> Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members
>>> for now):
>>>
>>> Government/IGO:
>>>
>>>    * Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>>>    * Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for
>>>      panel 1?)
>>>    * Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>>>
>>>    * Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>>>    * Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>>>    * Larry Strickling (US)
>>>    * Ed Vaizy (UK)
>>>    * Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>>>    * Alice Munyua (AU)
>>>
>>> Private Sector:
>>>
>>>    * Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>>>    * Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>>>    * Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>>>    * Phil Rushton (BT)
>>>    * Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>>>
>>> Technical Community:
>>>
>>>    * Jari Arkko (IETF)
>>>    * Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>>>    * Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>>>    * Byron Holland (CIRA)
>>>    * Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>>>    * Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>>>
>>> Civil Society:
>>>
>>>    * Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>>>    * Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>>>    * Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>>>    * Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>>>    * Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>>>    * Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>>>    * Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>>>    * Adam Peake (Glocom)
>>>
>>>
>>> Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>>>>
>>>> regards
>>>>
>>>> Subi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
>>>> <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>      Subi,
>>>>
>>>>      apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>>>
>>>>      /Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland///
>>>>
>>>>      /Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in
>>>>      European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where
>>>>      he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and European
>>>>      Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since
>>>>      November 2013, Minister of Administration and Digitalization.
>>>>       Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding //Internet governance
>>>>      and advocacy of the //multistakeholder/ /approach/ /have been
>>>>      treated with top priority by the Polish government.  Active
>>>>      participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF
>>>>      Polska are a few examples of his recent activities./
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>      It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:
>>>>       Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl <mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>
>>>>
>>>>      Best
>>>>      Igor
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>      On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>>      <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>      Many thanks Igor.
>>>>>
>>>>>      Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>>>
>>>>>      Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>>>
>>>>>      Regards
>>>>>
>>>>>      Subi
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>      On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
>>>>>      <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>>>>      >
>>>>>      > Dear All,
>>>>>      >
>>>>>      > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of
>>>>>      Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability
>>>>>      as well
>>>>>      >
>>>>>      > Best
>>>>>      > Igor
>>>>>      >
>>>>>      >
>>>>>      > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>>>      <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>      >
>>>>>      >> Dear All,
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>>>>      >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed
>>>>>      their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-;
>>>>>      Technical Community.
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your
>>>>>      organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails
>>>>>      which were sent out previously.
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew
>>>>>      and Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive
>>>>>      inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others.
>>>>>      Not sure if Markus will be on the call today but we have a wide
>>>>>      pool of options from accross stakeholder groups and some names
>>>>>      for moderators to choose from.
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several
>>>>>      emails.
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and
>>>>>      policy questions.
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>>>>      >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep
>>>>>      maximum time for participation and interventions from the floor
>>>>>      and non facilitators.
>>>>>      >> 2. Format:
>>>>>      >> A-no moderator
>>>>>      >> B-4 moderators
>>>>>      >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and
>>>>>      then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder
>>>>>      groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>>>>>      >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with
>>>>>      audience interventions only
>>>>>      >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>>>>      >> D. An open space
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>>>>      >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since
>>>>>      inputs have been received on session format the moratorium
>>>>>      imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be lifted to give
>>>>>      them enough notice to block their calenders)
>>>>>      >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self
>>>>>      nominations.  So we have them too.
>>>>>      >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with
>>>>>      youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would
>>>>>      they like to nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic
>>>>>      Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> Any other inputs.
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and
>>>>>      contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> Regards
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> Subi
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      >> _______________________________________________
>>>>>      >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>>>>      >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>>>>>      >>
>>>>>      http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>>>>      >
>>>>>      >
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>
>> --
>> `````````````````````````````````
>> anriette esterhuysen
>> executive director
>> association for progressive communications
>> po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
>> anriette at apc.org
>> www.apc.org
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>



From wjdrake at gmail.com  Thu Aug  7 07:51:02 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 13:51:02 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
Message-ID: <F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>

Hi

On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:34 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:

> I have stopped contributing to this list because I am confused about the decision making structure. Is it this list who decides on the direction and composition of this main session or are decisions made elsewhere? I so, by whom?

Please do contribute Jeanette, the standard MAG+ planning group model applies unless a decision to do something else is taken, and no such decision was taken.

On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of
> the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial"

I?d strongly support this streamlining and updating.

On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:59 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:

> Speakers need to be people that have an established history and understanding of the IGF.


I agree with this as well, we can?t have a really conversation about strengthening IGF that could, e.g. stimulate intersessional, focused, NM-style discussions leading to the Brazil IGF (which I?m told the hosts there want) unless we have folks who?ve been seriously engaged on the matter.

I mentioned before that Jeremy Malcolm (CS), Markus (TC), and Vint/Patrick/Max (PS) have written papers with specific proposals for IGF strengthening that will be included in a multi-author book we?ll lease on Day 0.  Vint is confirmed here, but Markus will already be on other main sessions. I?d support Jeremy putting forward his ideas here, or Adam.

Another TC option who?d have been perfect on the IGF panel is Raul Echeberria.  He has a long standing interest in this matter.  But with Kathy already onboard it?d be awkward to have two speakers from the same organization.

On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:54 PM, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov> wrote:

> I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.


Personally I think it would be excellent to have Larry on the ecosystem panel alongside Neelie, Fadi, Milton and some Global South voices + people involved in the NETmundial Initiative.

To move this forward we simply need people to start weighing in and proposing/supporting options so we can reach consensus and move to the next task etc...

Best

Bill
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140807/73899947/attachment.htm>

From anriette at apc.org  Thu Aug  7 07:53:26 2014
From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 13:53:26 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org>
	<53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53E368B6.9090609@apc.org>

Agree with Jeanette's suggestions.

Only other thought would be to make sure that organisers of previous
IGFs are considered. We probably can't have them all, but it would be
good to see more people from previous host governments.

Anriette


On 07/08/2014 13:51, William Drake wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:34 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu
> <mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu>> wrote:
>
>> I have stopped contributing to this list because I am confused about
>> the decision making structure. Is it this list who decides on the
>> direction and composition of this main session or are decisions made
>> elsewhere? I so, by whom?
>
> Please do contribute Jeanette, the standard MAG+ planning group model
> applies unless a decision to do something else is taken, and no such
> decision was taken.
>
> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>
>> "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of
>> the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial"
>
> I?d strongly support this streamlining and updating.
>
> On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:59 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org
> <mailto:anriette at apc.org>> wrote:
>
>> Speakers need to be people that have an established history and
>> understanding of the IGF.
>
> I agree with this as well, we can?t have a really conversation
> about strengthening IGF that could, e.g. stimulate intersessional,
> focused, NM-style discussions leading to the Brazil IGF (which I?m
> told the hosts there want) unless we have folks who?ve been seriously
> engaged on the matter.
>
> I mentioned before that Jeremy Malcolm (CS), Markus (TC), and
> Vint/Patrick/Max (PS) have written papers with specific proposals for
> IGF strengthening that will be included in a multi-author book we?ll
> lease on Day 0.  Vint is confirmed here, but Markus will already be on
> other main sessions. I?d support Jeremy putting forward his ideas
> here, or Adam.
>
> Another TC option who?d have been perfect on the IGF panel is Raul
> Echeberria.  He has a long standing interest in this matter.  But with
> Kathy already onboard it?d be awkward to have two speakers from the
> same organization.
>
> On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:54 PM, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov
> <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
>
>> I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a
>> possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted
>> regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government
>> speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>
> Personally I think it would be excellent to have Larry on the
> ecosystem panel alongside Neelie, Fadi, Milton and some Global South
> voices + people involved in the NETmundial Initiative.
>
> To move this forward we simply need people to start weighing in and
> proposing/supporting options so we can reach consensus and move to the
> next task etc...
>
> Best
>
> Bill
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

-- 
`````````````````````````````````
anriette esterhuysen
executive director
association for progressive communications
po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
anriette at apc.org
www.apc.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140807/00474e6c/attachment.htm>

From jeanette at wzb.eu  Thu Aug  7 08:00:34 2014
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 14:00:34 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E368B6.9090609@apc.org>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org>	<53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org>
Message-ID: <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>

Hi again,

regarding composition, I've argued against big panels with big names 
some time back.

Regarding substance, I think one important aspect concerns the 
relationship between NetMundia and IGF.

On the 1net list, there is an interesting dialogue between Janis and 
others on the question whether the IGF can indeed learn something from 
NetMundial. I would like this question to be addressed in this main 
session: What was unique about NetMundia, what can be repeated or build 
on and what conditions are necessary to institutionalize the good 
elements of NetMundial.
Could this be one topic for this main session, what do you think?

Jeanette

Am 07.08.2014 13:53, schrieb Anriette Esterhuysen:
> Agree with Jeanette's suggestions.
>
> Only other thought would be to make sure that organisers of previous
> IGFs are considered. We probably can't have them all, but it would be
> good to see more people from previous host governments.
>
> Anriette
>
>
> On 07/08/2014 13:51, William Drake wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:34 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu
>> <mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have stopped contributing to this list because I am confused about
>>> the decision making structure. Is it this list who decides on the
>>> direction and composition of this main session or are decisions made
>>> elsewhere? I so, by whom?
>>
>> Please do contribute Jeanette, the standard MAG+ planning group model
>> applies unless a decision to do something else is taken, and no such
>> decision was taken.
>>
>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
>> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of
>>> the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial"
>>
>> I?d strongly support this streamlining and updating.
>>
>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:59 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org
>> <mailto:anriette at apc.org>> wrote:
>>
>>> Speakers need to be people that have an established history and
>>> understanding of the IGF.
>>
>> I agree with this as well, we can?t have a really conversation
>> about strengthening IGF that could, e.g. stimulate intersessional,
>> focused, NM-style discussions leading to the Brazil IGF (which I?m
>> told the hosts there want) unless we have folks who?ve been seriously
>> engaged on the matter.
>>
>> I mentioned before that Jeremy Malcolm (CS), Markus (TC), and
>> Vint/Patrick/Max (PS) have written papers with specific proposals for
>> IGF strengthening that will be included in a multi-author book we?ll
>> lease on Day 0.  Vint is confirmed here, but Markus will already be on
>> other main sessions. I?d support Jeremy putting forward his ideas
>> here, or Adam.
>>
>> Another TC option who?d have been perfect on the IGF panel is Raul
>> Echeberria.  He has a long standing interest in this matter.  But with
>> Kathy already onboard it?d be awkward to have two speakers from the
>> same organization.
>>
>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:54 PM, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov
>> <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
>>
>>> I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a
>>> possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted
>>> regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government
>>> speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>>
>> Personally I think it would be excellent to have Larry on the
>> ecosystem panel alongside Neelie, Fadi, Milton and some Global South
>> voices + people involved in the NETmundial Initiative.
>>
>> To move this forward we simply need people to start weighing in and
>> proposing/supporting options so we can reach consensus and move to the
>> next task etc...
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
> --
> `````````````````````````````````
> anriette esterhuysen
> executive director
> association for progressive communications
> po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
> anriette at apc.org
> www.apc.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>



From mshears at cdt.org  Thu Aug  7 08:24:22 2014
From: mshears at cdt.org (Matthew Shears)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 13:24:22 +0100
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org>	<53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org>
	<53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
Message-ID: <53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>

Jeanette

Completely agree on "what can we learn from NETmundial."  While the 
question what can the IGF learn is critical, I would like to see the 
question posed more broadly - what can the diverse Internet 
governance/policy processes/fora, whether the IGF or the WSIS+10 review 
or the ITU (particularly given the Plenipotentiary coming up), learn 
from NETmundial?

Matthew

On 8/7/2014 1:00 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> regarding composition, I've argued against big panels with big names 
> some time back.
>
> Regarding substance, I think one important aspect concerns the 
> relationship between NetMundia and IGF.
>
> On the 1net list, there is an interesting dialogue between Janis and 
> others on the question whether the IGF can indeed learn something from 
> NetMundial. I would like this question to be addressed in this main 
> session: What was unique about NetMundia, what can be repeated or 
> build on and what conditions are necessary to institutionalize the 
> good elements of NetMundial.
> Could this be one topic for this main session, what do you think?
>
> Jeanette
>
> Am 07.08.2014 13:53, schrieb Anriette Esterhuysen:
>> Agree with Jeanette's suggestions.
>>
>> Only other thought would be to make sure that organisers of previous
>> IGFs are considered. We probably can't have them all, but it would be
>> good to see more people from previous host governments.
>>
>> Anriette
>>
>>
>> On 07/08/2014 13:51, William Drake wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:34 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu
>>> <mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have stopped contributing to this list because I am confused about
>>>> the decision making structure. Is it this list who decides on the
>>>> direction and composition of this main session or are decisions made
>>>> elsewhere? I so, by whom?
>>>
>>> Please do contribute Jeanette, the standard MAG+ planning group model
>>> applies unless a decision to do something else is taken, and no such
>>> decision was taken.
>>>
>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
>>> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance 
>>>> Ecosystem/Role of
>>>> the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial"
>>>
>>> I?d strongly support this streamlining and updating.
>>>
>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:59 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org
>>> <mailto:anriette at apc.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Speakers need to be people that have an established history and
>>>> understanding of the IGF.
>>>
>>> I agree with this as well, we can?t have a really conversation
>>> about strengthening IGF that could, e.g. stimulate intersessional,
>>> focused, NM-style discussions leading to the Brazil IGF (which I?m
>>> told the hosts there want) unless we have folks who?ve been seriously
>>> engaged on the matter.
>>>
>>> I mentioned before that Jeremy Malcolm (CS), Markus (TC), and
>>> Vint/Patrick/Max (PS) have written papers with specific proposals for
>>> IGF strengthening that will be included in a multi-author book we?ll
>>> lease on Day 0.  Vint is confirmed here, but Markus will already be on
>>> other main sessions. I?d support Jeremy putting forward his ideas
>>> here, or Adam.
>>>
>>> Another TC option who?d have been perfect on the IGF panel is Raul
>>> Echeberria.  He has a long standing interest in this matter. But with
>>> Kathy already onboard it?d be awkward to have two speakers from the
>>> same organization.
>>>
>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:54 PM, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov
>>> <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a
>>>> possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted
>>>> regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government
>>>> speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>>>
>>> Personally I think it would be excellent to have Larry on the
>>> ecosystem panel alongside Neelie, Fadi, Milton and some Global South
>>> voices + people involved in the NETmundial Initiative.
>>>
>>> To move this forward we simply need people to start weighing in and
>>> proposing/supporting options so we can reach consensus and move to the
>>> next task etc...
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org 
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> `````````````````````````````````
>> anriette esterhuysen
>> executive director
>> association for progressive communications
>> po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
>> anriette at apc.org
>> www.apc.org
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org 
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org 
>

-- 
Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
mshears at cdt.org
+ 44 771 247 2987





From jeanette at wzb.eu  Thu Aug  7 08:37:17 2014
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 14:37:17 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
Message-ID: <aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>

Matthew, I see your point and considered framing the issue broader. I decided against because I thought that if we include the whole IG landscape we might end up with a debate without a clear focus and miss a chance to gain concrete insights. I guess this is a trade off we need to think about. 
Jeanette 

On 7 August 2014 14:24:22 CEST, Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org> wrote:
>Jeanette
>
>Completely agree on "what can we learn from NETmundial."  While the 
>question what can the IGF learn is critical, I would like to see the 
>question posed more broadly - what can the diverse Internet 
>governance/policy processes/fora, whether the IGF or the WSIS+10 review
>
>or the ITU (particularly given the Plenipotentiary coming up), learn 
>from NETmundial?
>
>Matthew
>
>On 8/7/2014 1:00 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>> Hi again,
>>
>> regarding composition, I've argued against big panels with big names 
>> some time back.
>>
>> Regarding substance, I think one important aspect concerns the 
>> relationship between NetMundia and IGF.
>>
>> On the 1net list, there is an interesting dialogue between Janis and 
>> others on the question whether the IGF can indeed learn something
>from 
>> NetMundial. I would like this question to be addressed in this main 
>> session: What was unique about NetMundia, what can be repeated or 
>> build on and what conditions are necessary to institutionalize the 
>> good elements of NetMundial.
>> Could this be one topic for this main session, what do you think?
>>
>> Jeanette
>>
>> Am 07.08.2014 13:53, schrieb Anriette Esterhuysen:
>>> Agree with Jeanette's suggestions.
>>>
>>> Only other thought would be to make sure that organisers of previous
>>> IGFs are considered. We probably can't have them all, but it would
>be
>>> good to see more people from previous host governments.
>>>
>>> Anriette
>>>
>>>
>>> On 07/08/2014 13:51, William Drake wrote:
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:34 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu
>>>> <mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have stopped contributing to this list because I am confused
>about
>>>>> the decision making structure. Is it this list who decides on the
>>>>> direction and composition of this main session or are decisions
>made
>>>>> elsewhere? I so, by whom?
>>>>
>>>> Please do contribute Jeanette, the standard MAG+ planning group
>model
>>>> applies unless a decision to do something else is taken, and no
>such
>>>> decision was taken.
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
>>>> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance 
>>>>> Ecosystem/Role of
>>>>> the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial"
>>>>
>>>> I?d strongly support this streamlining and updating.
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:59 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org
>>>> <mailto:anriette at apc.org>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Speakers need to be people that have an established history and
>>>>> understanding of the IGF.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with this as well, we can?t have a really conversation
>>>> about strengthening IGF that could, e.g. stimulate intersessional,
>>>> focused, NM-style discussions leading to the Brazil IGF (which I?m
>>>> told the hosts there want) unless we have folks who?ve been
>seriously
>>>> engaged on the matter.
>>>>
>>>> I mentioned before that Jeremy Malcolm (CS), Markus (TC), and
>>>> Vint/Patrick/Max (PS) have written papers with specific proposals
>for
>>>> IGF strengthening that will be included in a multi-author book
>we?ll
>>>> lease on Day 0.  Vint is confirmed here, but Markus will already be
>on
>>>> other main sessions. I?d support Jeremy putting forward his ideas
>>>> here, or Adam.
>>>>
>>>> Another TC option who?d have been perfect on the IGF panel is Raul
>>>> Echeberria.  He has a long standing interest in this matter. But
>with
>>>> Kathy already onboard it?d be awkward to have two speakers from the
>>>> same organization.
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:54 PM, Fiona Alexander
><FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov
>>>> <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a
>>>>> possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted
>>>>> regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US
>Government
>>>>> speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>>>>
>>>> Personally I think it would be excellent to have Larry on the
>>>> ecosystem panel alongside Neelie, Fadi, Milton and some Global
>South
>>>> voices + people involved in the NETmundial Initiative.
>>>>
>>>> To move this forward we simply need people to start weighing in and
>>>> proposing/supporting options so we can reach consensus and move to
>the
>>>> next task etc...
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>
>http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> `````````````````````````````````
>>> anriette esterhuysen
>>> executive director
>>> association for progressive communications
>>> po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
>>> anriette at apc.org
>>> www.apc.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>
>http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>
>http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>>

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.



From wjdrake at gmail.com  Thu Aug  7 10:12:31 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 16:12:31 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>

Hi

The concept as agreed a few months ago on a MAG call was a panel on a) major policy developments in the ecosystem (initially a laundry list per the working title, Plenipot, WSIS10, CSTD, NM) => a panel on b) implications for the role and functioning of the IGF, e.g. how to strengthen it to be a more functional space that contributes to the search for solutions.  Then the NM Initiative got pre-announced and Janis correctly noted this should be an key debate framer.  Meanwhile, as I half mentioned in a prior message, several of us had a brainstorming session in Meissen and Hartmut (who I believe is subscribed to this list and can correct me if I misstate) indicated that Brazil would like to at least consider some sort of NM-type process under the IGF aegis leading up to IGF 2015 in Brazil, as a part (day or two) of the larger program along with the usual workshops etc.  To be productive, I?d think it?d have to focus on an issue or two rather than the whole IG world, but that?s just me.  

Either way, while this is the sort of thing IGF-centric civil society networks have advocated for a decade, for many other stakeholders it may be a new or as yet unpersuasive idea.  So the point would be to have an open dialogue about the potential risks and rewards of trying something like that, and alternatives; one would expect a vibrant debate with who knows what outcome.  Broadening the focus of the second half beyond the IGF would defeat the purpose.  

I agree with Jeanette that the panels should not be large and should not be doing long prepared talks.  Brief opening statements of approach, then well moderated and interactive dialogue with the room.  I liked Subi?s suggestion

On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:

> deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each of the two halves.

So to make this work well we?d need get input and reach closure on initial speakers and moderators who are really keyed into the local history and this nexus of ideas. And Janis noted in his message today that with three weeks left and a MAG meeting on the 19th we need to work urgently to pull this together.  

A suggestion: at some point in the past weeks folks started copying the MAG on all this working groups? messages and the traffic may not be of interest to all, so we might consider jet reverting to evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org?

Best

Bill



On Aug 7, 2014, at 2:37 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:

> Matthew, I see your point and considered framing the issue broader. I decided against because I thought that if we include the whole IG landscape we might end up with a debate without a clear focus and miss a chance to gain concrete insights. I guess this is a trade off we need to think about. 
> Jeanette 
> 
> On 7 August 2014 14:24:22 CEST, Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org> wrote:
>> Jeanette
>> 
>> Completely agree on "what can we learn from NETmundial."  While the 
>> question what can the IGF learn is critical, I would like to see the 
>> question posed more broadly - what can the diverse Internet 
>> governance/policy processes/fora, whether the IGF or the WSIS+10 review
>> 
>> or the ITU (particularly given the Plenipotentiary coming up), learn 
>> from NETmundial?
>> 
>> Matthew
>> 
>> On 8/7/2014 1:00 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>>> Hi again,
>>> 
>>> regarding composition, I've argued against big panels with big names 
>>> some time back.
>>> 
>>> Regarding substance, I think one important aspect concerns the 
>>> relationship between NetMundia and IGF.
>>> 
>>> On the 1net list, there is an interesting dialogue between Janis and 
>>> others on the question whether the IGF can indeed learn something
>> from 
>>> NetMundial. I would like this question to be addressed in this main 
>>> session: What was unique about NetMundia, what can be repeated or 
>>> build on and what conditions are necessary to institutionalize the 
>>> good elements of NetMundial.
>>> Could this be one topic for this main session, what do you think?
>>> 
>>> Jeanette
>>> 
>>> Am 07.08.2014 13:53, schrieb Anriette Esterhuysen:
>>>> Agree with Jeanette's suggestions.
>>>> 
>>>> Only other thought would be to make sure that organisers of previous
>>>> IGFs are considered. We probably can't have them all, but it would
>> be
>>>> good to see more people from previous host governments.
>>>> 
>>>> Anriette
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 07/08/2014 13:51, William Drake wrote:
>>>>> Hi
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:34 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu
>>>>> <mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have stopped contributing to this list because I am confused
>> about
>>>>>> the decision making structure. Is it this list who decides on the
>>>>>> direction and composition of this main session or are decisions
>> made
>>>>>> elsewhere? I so, by whom?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please do contribute Jeanette, the standard MAG+ planning group
>> model
>>>>> applies unless a decision to do something else is taken, and no
>> such
>>>>> decision was taken.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
>>>>> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance 
>>>>>> Ecosystem/Role of
>>>>>> the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial"
>>>>> 
>>>>> I?d strongly support this streamlining and updating.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:59 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org
>>>>> <mailto:anriette at apc.org>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Speakers need to be people that have an established history and
>>>>>> understanding of the IGF.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I agree with this as well, we can?t have a really conversation
>>>>> about strengthening IGF that could, e.g. stimulate intersessional,
>>>>> focused, NM-style discussions leading to the Brazil IGF (which I?m
>>>>> told the hosts there want) unless we have folks who?ve been
>> seriously
>>>>> engaged on the matter.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I mentioned before that Jeremy Malcolm (CS), Markus (TC), and
>>>>> Vint/Patrick/Max (PS) have written papers with specific proposals
>> for
>>>>> IGF strengthening that will be included in a multi-author book
>> we?ll
>>>>> lease on Day 0.  Vint is confirmed here, but Markus will already be
>> on
>>>>> other main sessions. I?d support Jeremy putting forward his ideas
>>>>> here, or Adam.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Another TC option who?d have been perfect on the IGF panel is Raul
>>>>> Echeberria.  He has a long standing interest in this matter. But
>> with
>>>>> Kathy already onboard it?d be awkward to have two speakers from the
>>>>> same organization.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:54 PM, Fiona Alexander
>> <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov
>>>>> <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a
>>>>>> possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted
>>>>>> regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US
>> Government
>>>>>> speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Personally I think it would be excellent to have Larry on the
>>>>> ecosystem panel alongside Neelie, Fadi, Milton and some Global
>> South
>>>>> voices + people involved in the NETmundial Initiative.
>>>>> 
>>>>> To move this forward we simply need people to start weighing in and
>>>>> proposing/supporting options so we can reach consensus and move to
>> the
>>>>> next task etc...
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best
>>>>> 
>>>>> Bill
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>> 
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> `````````````````````````````````
>>>> anriette esterhuysen
>>>> executive director
>>>> association for progressive communications
>>>> po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
>>>> anriette at apc.org
>>>> www.apc.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>> 
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>> 
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>> 
>>> 
> 
> -- 
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.




From jeanette at wzb.eu  Thu Aug  7 11:23:02 2014
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 17:23:02 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>



Am 07.08.2014 16:12, schrieb William Drake:
> Hi
>
> (...)
> Meanwhile, as I half mentioned in a prior message, several of us had
> a brainstorming session in Meissen and Hartmut (who I believe is
> subscribed to this list and can correct me if I misstate) indicated
> that Brazil would like to at least consider some sort of NM-type
> process under the IGF aegis leading up to IGF 2015 in Brazil, as a
> part (day or two) of the larger program along with the usual
> workshops etc.  To be productive, I?d think it?d have to focus on an
> issue or two rather than the whole IG world, but that?s just me.

Bill,

if I understand you correctly, Brazil would like the IGF to consider 
translating the NetMundial event into a process under the umbrella of 
the IGF and that would start after IGF2014 and presumably end at 
IGF2015? And you suggest adding this idea to the list of issues to be 
discussed in the ecosystem session? I am just asking for clarification.
jeanette



> Either way, while this is the sort of thing IGF-centric civil society
> networks have advocated for a decade, for many other stakeholders it
> may be a new or as yet unpersuasive idea.  So the point would be to
> have an open dialogue about the potential risks and rewards of trying
> something like that, and alternatives; one would expect a vibrant
> debate with who knows what outcome.  Broadening the focus of the
> second half beyond the IGF would defeat the purpose.
>
> I agree with Jeanette that the panels should not be large and should
> not be doing long prepared talks.  Brief opening statements of
> approach, then well moderated and interactive dialogue with the room.
> I liked Subi?s suggestion
>
> On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
> <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then
>> abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups
>> for each of the two halves.
>
> So to make this work well we?d need get input and reach closure on
> initial speakers and moderators who are really keyed into the local
> history and this nexus of ideas. And Janis noted in his message today
> that with three weeks left and a MAG meeting on the 19th we need to
> work urgently to pull this together.
>
> A suggestion: at some point in the past weeks folks started copying
> the MAG on all this working groups? messages and the traffic may not
> be of interest to all, so we might consider jet reverting to
> evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org?
>
> Best
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> On Aug 7, 2014, at 2:37 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu>
> wrote:
>
>> Matthew, I see your point and considered framing the issue broader.
>> I decided against because I thought that if we include the whole IG
>> landscape we might end up with a debate without a clear focus and
>> miss a chance to gain concrete insights. I guess this is a trade
>> off we need to think about. Jeanette
>>
>> On 7 August 2014 14:24:22 CEST, Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org>
>> wrote:
>>> Jeanette
>>>
>>> Completely agree on "what can we learn from NETmundial."  While
>>> the question what can the IGF learn is critical, I would like to
>>> see the question posed more broadly - what can the diverse
>>> Internet governance/policy processes/fora, whether the IGF or the
>>> WSIS+10 review
>>>
>>> or the ITU (particularly given the Plenipotentiary coming up),
>>> learn from NETmundial?
>>>
>>> Matthew
>>>
>>> On 8/7/2014 1:00 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>>>> Hi again,
>>>>
>>>> regarding composition, I've argued against big panels with big
>>>> names some time back.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding substance, I think one important aspect concerns the
>>>> relationship between NetMundia and IGF.
>>>>
>>>> On the 1net list, there is an interesting dialogue between
>>>> Janis and others on the question whether the IGF can indeed
>>>> learn something
>>> from
>>>> NetMundial. I would like this question to be addressed in this
>>>> main session: What was unique about NetMundia, what can be
>>>> repeated or build on and what conditions are necessary to
>>>> institutionalize the good elements of NetMundial. Could this be
>>>> one topic for this main session, what do you think?
>>>>
>>>> Jeanette
>>>>
>>>> Am 07.08.2014 13:53, schrieb Anriette Esterhuysen:
>>>>> Agree with Jeanette's suggestions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Only other thought would be to make sure that organisers of
>>>>> previous IGFs are considered. We probably can't have them
>>>>> all, but it would
>>> be
>>>>> good to see more people from previous host governments.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anriette
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 07/08/2014 13:51, William Drake wrote:
>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:34 PM, Jeanette Hofmann
>>>>>> <jeanette at wzb.eu <mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have stopped contributing to this list because I am
>>>>>>> confused
>>> about
>>>>>>> the decision making structure. Is it this list who
>>>>>>> decides on the direction and composition of this main
>>>>>>> session or are decisions
>>> made
>>>>>>> elsewhere? I so, by whom?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please do contribute Jeanette, the standard MAG+ planning
>>>>>> group
>>> model
>>>>>> applies unless a decision to do something else is taken,
>>>>>> and no
>>> such
>>>>>> decision was taken.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
>>>>>> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance
>>>>>>> Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I?d strongly support this streamlining and updating.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:59 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen
>>>>>> <anriette at apc.org <mailto:anriette at apc.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Speakers need to be people that have an established
>>>>>>> history and understanding of the IGF.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with this as well, we can?t have a really
>>>>>> conversation about strengthening IGF that could, e.g.
>>>>>> stimulate intersessional, focused, NM-style discussions
>>>>>> leading to the Brazil IGF (which I?m told the hosts there
>>>>>> want) unless we have folks who?ve been
>>> seriously
>>>>>> engaged on the matter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I mentioned before that Jeremy Malcolm (CS), Markus (TC),
>>>>>> and Vint/Patrick/Max (PS) have written papers with specific
>>>>>> proposals
>>> for
>>>>>> IGF strengthening that will be included in a multi-author
>>>>>> book
>>> we?ll
>>>>>> lease on Day 0.  Vint is confirmed here, but Markus will
>>>>>> already be
>>> on
>>>>>> other main sessions. I?d support Jeremy putting forward his
>>>>>> ideas here, or Adam.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Another TC option who?d have been perfect on the IGF panel
>>>>>> is Raul Echeberria.  He has a long standing interest in
>>>>>> this matter. But
>>> with
>>>>>> Kathy already onboard it?d be awkward to have two speakers
>>>>>> from the same organization.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:54 PM, Fiona Alexander
>>> <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov
>>>>>> <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is
>>>>>>> listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has
>>>>>>> not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a
>>>>>>> desire to have a US
>>> Government
>>>>>>> speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally I think it would be excellent to have Larry on
>>>>>> the ecosystem panel alongside Neelie, Fadi, Milton and some
>>>>>> Global
>>> South
>>>>>> voices + people involved in the NETmundial Initiative.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To move this forward we simply need people to start
>>>>>> weighing in and proposing/supporting options so we can
>>>>>> reach consensus and move to
>>> the
>>>>>> next task etc...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>>>
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
-- 
>>>>> ````````````````````````````````` anriette esterhuysen
>>>>> executive director association for progressive
>>>>> communications po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
>>>>> anriette at apc.org www.apc.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>>
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>
-- 
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my
>> brevity.
>



From wjdrake at gmail.com  Thu Aug  7 11:37:00 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 17:37:00 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
Message-ID: <6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>


On Aug 7, 2014, at 5:23 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:

> 
> Am 07.08.2014 16:12, schrieb William Drake:
>> Hi
>> 
>> (...)
>> Meanwhile, as I half mentioned in a prior message, several of us had
>> a brainstorming session in Meissen and Hartmut (who I believe is
>> subscribed to this list and can correct me if I misstate) indicated
>> that Brazil would like to at least consider some sort of NM-type
>> process under the IGF aegis leading up to IGF 2015 in Brazil, as a
>> part (day or two) of the larger program along with the usual
>> workshops etc.  To be productive, I?d think it?d have to focus on an
>> issue or two rather than the whole IG world, but that?s just me.
> 
> Bill,
> 
> if I understand you correctly, Brazil would like the IGF to consider translating the NetMundial event into a process under the umbrella of the IGF and that would start after IGF2014 and presumably end at IGF2015? And you suggest adding this idea to the list of issues to be discussed in the ecosystem session? I am just asking for clarification.

Again, Hartmut can speak for himself (copying him here), but I understood the conversation (Avri, Wolfgang, Nigel, John LaPrise also there) was let's think about whether the model offers any possible lessons for how we might prepare and organize IG2015.  Of course, it probably wouldn?t be a straight transposition of every element of the NM experience, but one can certainly imagine some that could be tried, and other non-NM options as well.  It needn?t take over the whole IGF and it certainly needn't turn into the sort of negotiation dynamics we?ve always avoided, either.   The point is to start thinking creatively and to see what could get support for across stakeholder groups in order to implement the relevant NM recommendations, 

 3.         There is a need for a strengthened Internet Governance Forum (IGF). Important recommendations to that end were made by the UN CSTD working group on IGF improvements. It is suggested that these recommendations will be implemented by the end of 2015.

Improvements should include inter-alia:

a.         Improved outcomes: Improvements can be implemented including creative ways of providing outcomes/recommendations and the analysis of policy options;

d.         The IGF should adopt mechanisms to promote worldwide discussions between meetings through intersessional dialogues.  

Bill
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140807/0870e8c0/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 02:15:46 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 11:45:46 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you Bill for all help and constructive contribution on this session.
This speaker list is now outdated.

Several emails have been circulated since for inputs from volunteers and
work has moved on this session over several calls too. A revised draft will
be circulated by C.O.B for final inputs.

Amb. Benedicto has already conveyed his acceptance for inputs on Netmundial
and IGF improvements,   And we have reached out to Minister Virgilio as
well, since Hartmut is heavily involved in the Day 0 Netmundial session. So
two speakers from the same OC might not make sense.

Also Avri thank you for your inputs. Always helpful. But changing the title
to Evol Internet Governance Ecosystem - a response to Netmundial for this
main might not be feasible because it has speakers from WEF, UNCSD, UNESCO,
WSIS and other parallel IG processes as well. The second part is about the
role of IGF and Strengthening IGF so the new title now will incorporate
both these aspects.

We have received excellent inputs from both MAG members and Non-MAG
volunteers and they have often been contrasting views. The list was set up
recently but the conversation has a long history with substantive inputs
from MAG volunteers involved in planning the session. Keeping all views in
mind we are therefore trying to strike a balance between number of speakers
and speakers with a  long history of IGF engagement while bringing in New
voices as suggested by some active members on the list.

The challenge is to have experienced speakers with new voices. Though an
attempt has been made to limit number of speakers but the nature of the
session requires a basic minimum number with significant processes being
represented.

An ask from all members of the MAG and the secretariat- For speakers from
civil society, academia and even the technical community funding still
remains a major challenge.
A unique problem has emerged during our outreach while there is still some
funding available for developing country participants it remains an issue
for civil society participants and speakers from developed countries.

And we have received several requests for assistance.

It would be tremendously helpful if existing MAG members and the
secretariat can point us to some of those resources so that we may direct
them to the wider community. The call from ISOC I believe is already past
deadline. Any other sources from your networks would contribute
tremendously in making this session more meaningful.


regards

Subi





On 7 August 2014 21:07, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Aug 7, 2014, at 5:23 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:
>
>
> Am 07.08.2014 16:12, schrieb William Drake:
>
> Hi
>
> (...)
> Meanwhile, as I half mentioned in a prior message, several of us had
> a brainstorming session in Meissen and Hartmut (who I believe is
> subscribed to this list and can correct me if I misstate) indicated
> that Brazil would like to at least consider some sort of NM-type
> process under the IGF aegis leading up to IGF 2015 in Brazil, as a
> part (day or two) of the larger program along with the usual
> workshops etc.  To be productive, I?d think it?d have to focus on an
> issue or two rather than the whole IG world, but that?s just me.
>
>
> Bill,
>
> if I understand you correctly, Brazil would like the IGF to consider
> translating the NetMundial event into a process under the umbrella of the
> IGF and that would start after IGF2014 and presumably end at IGF2015? And
> you suggest adding this idea to the list of issues to be discussed in the
> ecosystem session? I am just asking for clarification.
>
>
> Again, Hartmut can speak for himself (copying him here), but I understood
> the conversation (Avri, Wolfgang, Nigel, John LaPrise also there) was let's
> think about whether the model offers any possible lessons for how we might
> prepare and organize IG2015.  Of course, it probably wouldn?t be a straight
> transposition of every element of the NM experience, but one can certainly
> imagine some that could be tried, and other non-NM options as well.  It
> needn?t take over the whole IGF and it certainly needn't turn into the sort
> of negotiation dynamics we?ve always avoided, either.   The point is to
> start thinking creatively and to see what could get support for across
> stakeholder groups in order to implement the relevant NM recommendations,
>
>
> * 3.         There is a need for a strengthened Internet Governance
> Forum (IGF). Important recommendations to that end were made by the UN CSTD
> working group on IGF improvements. It is suggested that these
> recommendations will be implemented by the end of 2015. *
>
>
>
>
> *Improvements should include inter-alia:a.         Improved outcomes:
> Improvements can be implemented including creative ways of providing
> outcomes/recommendations and the analysis of policy options; d.         The
> IGF should adopt mechanisms to promote worldwide discussions
> between meetings through intersessional dialogues.  *
>
> Bill
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/b11cd442/attachment.htm>

From jeanette at wzb.eu  Fri Aug  8 02:35:47 2014
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 08:35:47 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org>
	<53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org>
	<53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>



Am 08.08.14 08:15, schrieb Subi Chaturvedi:
> Thank you Bill for all help and constructive contribution on this
> session. This speaker list is now outdated.
>
> Several emails have been circulated since for inputs from volunteers and
> work has moved on this session over several calls too.

Subi, thank you for your update. Do I understand you correctly that the 
actual preparation of this session takes place elsewhere, outside of 
this list? Would you please explain?

jeanette




A revised draft
> will be circulated by C.O.B for final inputs.
>
> Amb. Benedicto has already conveyed his acceptance for inputs on
> Netmundial and IGF improvements,   And we have reached out to Minister
> Virgilio as well, since Hartmut is heavily involved in the Day 0
> Netmundial session. So two speakers from the same OC might not make sense.
>
> Also Avri thank you for your inputs. Always helpful. But changing the
> title to Evol Internet Governance Ecosystem - a response to Netmundial
> for this main might not be feasible because it has speakers from WEF,
> UNCSD, UNESCO, WSIS and other parallel IG processes as well. The second
> part is about the role of IGF and Strengthening IGF so the new title now
> will incorporate both these aspects.
>
> We have received excellent inputs from both MAG members and Non-MAG
> volunteers and they have often been contrasting views. The list was set
> up recently but the conversation has a long history with substantive
> inputs from MAG volunteers involved in planning the session. Keeping all
> views in mind we are therefore trying to strike a balance between number
> of speakers and speakers with a  long history of IGF engagement while
> bringing in New voices as suggested by some active members on the list.
>
> The challenge is to have experienced speakers with new voices. Though an
> attempt has been made to limit number of speakers but the nature of the
> session requires a basic minimum number with significant processes being
> represented.
>
> An ask from all members of the MAG and the secretariat- For speakers
> from civil society, academia and even the technical community funding
> still remains a major challenge.
> A unique problem has emerged during our outreach while there is still
> some funding available for developing country participants it remains an
> issue for civil society participants and speakers from developed countries.
>
> And we have received several requests for assistance.
>
> It would be tremendously helpful if existing MAG members and the
> secretariat can point us to some of those resources so that we may
> direct them to the wider community. The call from ISOC I believe is
> already past deadline. Any other sources from your networks would
> contribute tremendously in making this session more meaningful.
>
>
> regards
>
> Subi
>
>
>
>
>
> On 7 August 2014 21:07, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com
> <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>     On Aug 7, 2014, at 5:23 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu
>     <mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu>> wrote:
>
>>
>>     Am 07.08.2014 16:12, schrieb William Drake:
>>>     Hi
>>>
>>>     (...)
>>>     Meanwhile, as I half mentioned in a prior message, several of us had
>>>     a brainstorming session in Meissen and Hartmut (who I believe is
>>>     subscribed to this list and can correct me if I misstate) indicated
>>>     that Brazil would like to at least consider some sort of NM-type
>>>     process under the IGF aegis leading up to IGF 2015 in Brazil, as a
>>>     part (day or two) of the larger program along with the usual
>>>     workshops etc.  To be productive, I?d think it?d have to focus on an
>>>     issue or two rather than the whole IG world, but that?s just me.
>>
>>     Bill,
>>
>>     if I understand you correctly, Brazil would like the IGF to
>>     consider translating the NetMundial event into a process under the
>>     umbrella of the IGF and that would start after IGF2014 and
>>     presumably end at IGF2015? And you suggest adding this idea to the
>>     list of issues to be discussed in the ecosystem session? I am just
>>     asking for clarification.
>
>     Again, Hartmut can speak for himself (copying him here), but I
>     understood the conversation (Avri, Wolfgang, Nigel, John LaPrise
>     also there) was let's think about whether the model offers any
>     possible lessons for how we might prepare and organize IG2015.  Of
>     course, it probably wouldn?t be a straight transposition of every
>     element of the NM experience, but one can certainly imagine some
>     that could be tried, and other non-NM options as well.  It needn?t
>     take over the whole IGF and it certainly needn't turn into the sort
>     of negotiation dynamics we?ve always avoided, either.   The point is
>     to start thinking creatively and to see what could get support for
>     across stakeholder groups in order to implement the relevant NM
>     recommendations,
>
>     / 3.         There is a need for a strengthened Internet Governance
>     Forum (IGF). Important recommendations to that end were made by the
>     UN CSTD working group on IGF improvements. It is suggested that
>     these recommendations will be implemented by the end of 2015.
>     /
>     /Improvements should include inter-alia:
>
>     a.         Improved outcomes: Improvements can be implemented
>     including creative ways of providing outcomes/recommendations and
>     the analysis of policy options;
>
>     d.         The IGF should adopt mechanisms to promote worldwide
>     discussions between meetings through intersessional dialogues. /
>     /
>     /
>     Bill
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>     Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org <mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>
>     http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>



From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 03:28:37 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 12:58:37 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>

Many thanks Jeanette for your question and your inputs. They have been most
helpful.

On The process of this main session prep-

Happy to share my understanding of the process. As most members on the list
have been active members on this session's prep since it's inception and
are familiar with the process I'll keep my intervention brief.

There are several stages through which an actual main goes through.

Contributions are sought at the two IGF meetings and over several virtual
calls.
Inputs are provided to the Chair and the secretariat. The final call is
then taken by the chair on which mains finally go through for this calendar
year.

This year as MAG members we then volunteered through a doodle poll for the
mains on which we wished to contribute more actively than others.

Every session then had ranging from 1- 2 and sometimes 4 co-leads from
amongst MAG members.

With about 16-18 volunteers per session.

Over several emails on the MAG list and individual calls and emails, inputs
have been contributed. Every main has then gone on to
organically synthesise these inputs. Some through a single mail and others
through a series of continuous engagements. The water is being
carried across different mains who have volunteered to coherently
assimilate inputs received.

Once a call for inputs is put out regarding specific requests the
co-leads generally wait within reason for specific inputs and specific
threads and then for the purpose of delivery and operationalisation of
actual logistical work  move the work along.
These decisions can't be deferred indefinitely. All available mediums of
communication are used and every possible effort is made to be as inclusive
as possible.

 This session has benefitted greatly from timely, pertinent and substantive
inputs from almost all MAG members and experienced members from the
community such as yourself. We welcome your continued inputs and
sustained engagement with the session.

The inputs for this session have been synthesised by Marilyn and me with
active inputs from Markus,Mathew (who were roped in for this session to
provide additional inputs) and Bill at different stages.

I am sure Marilyn can elaborate more, if necessary.

If you have any specific queries we would be happy to respond to them off
the list.

regards

Subi



On 8 August 2014 12:05, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:

>
>
> Am 08.08.14 08:15, schrieb Subi Chaturvedi:
>
>  Thank you Bill for all help and constructive contribution on this
>> session. This speaker list is now outdated.
>>
>> Several emails have been circulated since for inputs from volunteers and
>> work has moved on this session over several calls too.
>>
>
> Subi, thank you for your update. Do I understand you correctly that the
> actual preparation of this session takes place elsewhere, outside of this
> list? Would you please explain?
>
> jeanette
>
>
>
>
> A revised draft
>
>> will be circulated by C.O.B for final inputs.
>>
>> Amb. Benedicto has already conveyed his acceptance for inputs on
>> Netmundial and IGF improvements,   And we have reached out to Minister
>> Virgilio as well, since Hartmut is heavily involved in the Day 0
>> Netmundial session. So two speakers from the same OC might not make sense.
>>
>> Also Avri thank you for your inputs. Always helpful. But changing the
>> title to Evol Internet Governance Ecosystem - a response to Netmundial
>> for this main might not be feasible because it has speakers from WEF,
>> UNCSD, UNESCO, WSIS and other parallel IG processes as well. The second
>> part is about the role of IGF and Strengthening IGF so the new title now
>> will incorporate both these aspects.
>>
>> We have received excellent inputs from both MAG members and Non-MAG
>> volunteers and they have often been contrasting views. The list was set
>> up recently but the conversation has a long history with substantive
>> inputs from MAG volunteers involved in planning the session. Keeping all
>> views in mind we are therefore trying to strike a balance between number
>> of speakers and speakers with a  long history of IGF engagement while
>> bringing in New voices as suggested by some active members on the list.
>>
>> The challenge is to have experienced speakers with new voices. Though an
>> attempt has been made to limit number of speakers but the nature of the
>> session requires a basic minimum number with significant processes being
>> represented.
>>
>> An ask from all members of the MAG and the secretariat- For speakers
>> from civil society, academia and even the technical community funding
>> still remains a major challenge.
>> A unique problem has emerged during our outreach while there is still
>> some funding available for developing country participants it remains an
>> issue for civil society participants and speakers from developed
>> countries.
>>
>> And we have received several requests for assistance.
>>
>> It would be tremendously helpful if existing MAG members and the
>> secretariat can point us to some of those resources so that we may
>> direct them to the wider community. The call from ISOC I believe is
>> already past deadline. Any other sources from your networks would
>> contribute tremendously in making this session more meaningful.
>>
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Subi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7 August 2014 21:07, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com
>> <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     On Aug 7, 2014, at 5:23 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu
>>     <mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>     Am 07.08.2014 16:12, schrieb William Drake:
>>>
>>>>     Hi
>>>>
>>>>     (...)
>>>>     Meanwhile, as I half mentioned in a prior message, several of us had
>>>>     a brainstorming session in Meissen and Hartmut (who I believe is
>>>>     subscribed to this list and can correct me if I misstate) indicated
>>>>     that Brazil would like to at least consider some sort of NM-type
>>>>     process under the IGF aegis leading up to IGF 2015 in Brazil, as a
>>>>     part (day or two) of the larger program along with the usual
>>>>     workshops etc.  To be productive, I?d think it?d have to focus on an
>>>>     issue or two rather than the whole IG world, but that?s just me.
>>>>
>>>
>>>     Bill,
>>>
>>>     if I understand you correctly, Brazil would like the IGF to
>>>     consider translating the NetMundial event into a process under the
>>>     umbrella of the IGF and that would start after IGF2014 and
>>>     presumably end at IGF2015? And you suggest adding this idea to the
>>>     list of issues to be discussed in the ecosystem session? I am just
>>>     asking for clarification.
>>>
>>
>>     Again, Hartmut can speak for himself (copying him here), but I
>>     understood the conversation (Avri, Wolfgang, Nigel, John LaPrise
>>     also there) was let's think about whether the model offers any
>>     possible lessons for how we might prepare and organize IG2015.  Of
>>     course, it probably wouldn?t be a straight transposition of every
>>     element of the NM experience, but one can certainly imagine some
>>     that could be tried, and other non-NM options as well.  It needn?t
>>     take over the whole IGF and it certainly needn't turn into the sort
>>     of negotiation dynamics we?ve always avoided, either.   The point is
>>     to start thinking creatively and to see what could get support for
>>     across stakeholder groups in order to implement the relevant NM
>>     recommendations,
>>
>>     / 3.         There is a need for a strengthened Internet Governance
>>
>>     Forum (IGF). Important recommendations to that end were made by the
>>     UN CSTD working group on IGF improvements. It is suggested that
>>     these recommendations will be implemented by the end of 2015.
>>     /
>>     /Improvements should include inter-alia:
>>
>>
>>     a.         Improved outcomes: Improvements can be implemented
>>     including creative ways of providing outcomes/recommendations and
>>     the analysis of policy options;
>>
>>     d.         The IGF should adopt mechanisms to promote worldwide
>>     discussions between meetings through intersessional dialogues. /
>>     /
>>     /
>>
>>     Bill
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>     Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org <mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> >
>>     http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/
>> evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/
>> evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/
> evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/46ab9b34/attachment.htm>

From wjdrake at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 04:26:33 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 10:26:33 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>

Hi Subi

On Aug 8, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> This year as MAG members we then volunteered through a doodle poll for the mains on which we wished to contribute more actively than others.
> 
> Every session then had ranging from 1- 2 and sometimes 4 co-leads from amongst MAG members.
> 
> With about 16-18 volunteers per session.
> 
> Over several emails on the MAG list and individual calls and emails, inputs have been contributed. Every main has then gone on to organically synthesise these inputs. Some through a single mail and others through a series of continuous engagements. The water is being carried across different mains who have volunteered to coherently assimilate inputs received.
> 
> Once a call for inputs is put out regarding specific requests the co-leads generally wait within reason for specific inputs and specific threads and then for the purpose of delivery and operationalisation of actual logistical work  move the work along.

The problem here is what 'move the work along' means.  With respect to inviting panelists, the consistent, standard practice of the MAG over the past decade has been that the lead facilitators keep a running track of the list of suggested names (actually, I had to step in and do that here), pose choices to the group, people weigh in and the group reaches consensus, and then the facilitators reach out to speakers and keep the list continuously informed as to the status?who?s accepted or not, what decision might need to be made accordingly. No collective decision to change these long-standing transparent and inclusive procedures was taken.  But it seems that your model is that people provide input and then the two first moving facilitators go off and make the decisions, often informing the group only when pestered for answers.  This is really just not how it works, sorry.

There are a number of outstanding choices to be made in filling out the panels.  Suggestions have been made by participants.  Let?s please follow the long-standing practice in making decisions from here.

I reiterate for reference my suggestions of Jeanette and Samantha Dickinson as moderators, Larry Strickling (govt) and Geoff Huston (TC) for the ecosystem panel, and Jeremy Malcolm or Adam Peake (CS) for the IGF panel.

Thanks

Bill


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/3c19cec6/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 04:54:25 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 14:24:25 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpJLHVXU_4_k_GJ8x0i3ZLjzxzE8ZeBn3WiVkDFzpCTZVw@mail.gmail.com>

Bill I am glad that we are in agreement then. All your suggestions have
duly incorporated.  And that is indeed the process followed. Respectfully,
I disagree with your statement that any attempt is being made to do this in
a manner which is top down. And it is unfair to constantly claim otherwise.
All of us have multiple things to do and we're all doing this voluntarily.
Yet we have neither discouraged any member from contributing nor have we
ignored any inputs. I am aware of your immense expertise and contribution
in this space. And we're all still learning. But this doesn't help. All
constructive inputs are welcome. Like the IGF we do not want the IGF MAG to
remain a decision making platform for a select few and by a select few.
This would only result in a chilling effect for new MAG members, who are
trying their best to contribute and create. It has been a constant effort
to divest the aura of a club.

We have sent out multiple calls for inputs and suggestions, invites to join
calls. And when inputs have been received they have all been incorporated
and responded to. You asked us to stop inviting speakers after our initial
calls for specific names remained unresponded to, we did exactly that.
 Sent out a fresh call again for inputs.

The people you have listed are indeed the people who have been approached
as speakers. Geoff Huston from the technical community is a new and welcome
addition. I do not have his contact details would be grateful if either you
or Paul can connect us with him.

You will recall my multiple emails on this list for specific inputs and
threads and for seeking contact details including email ids and contact
details of all the speakers, volunteers are recommending.

Every single suggestion has been incorporated received from all MAG
volunteers working on this session.

Jeremy's emails seem to be bouncing back. Would be grateful if you can
provide us an alternative mail. We have reached out to him multiple times
at      jeremy at ciroap.org

Thank you again for actively contributing on this session. I look forward
to any inputs that you might have further to make this session better and
more meaningful.

regards

Subi



On 8 August 2014 13:56, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Subi
>
> On Aug 8, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> This year as MAG members we then volunteered through a doodle poll for the
> mains on which we wished to contribute more actively than others.
>
> Every session then had ranging from 1- 2 and sometimes 4 co-leads from
> amongst MAG members.
>
> With about 16-18 volunteers per session.
>
> Over several emails on the MAG list and individual calls and emails,
> inputs have been contributed. Every main has then gone on to
> organically synthesise these inputs. Some through a single mail and others
> through a series of continuous engagements. The water is being
> carried across different mains who have volunteered to coherently
> assimilate inputs received.
>
> Once a call for inputs is put out regarding specific requests the
> co-leads generally wait within reason for specific inputs and specific
> threads and then for the purpose of delivery and operationalisation of
> actual logistical work  move the work along.
>
>
> The problem here is what 'move the work along' means.  With respect to
> inviting panelists, the consistent, standard practice of the MAG over the
> past decade has been that the lead facilitators keep a running track of the
> list of suggested names (actually, I had to step in and do that here), pose
> choices to the group, people weigh in and the group reaches consensus, and
> then the facilitators reach out to speakers and keep the list continuously
> informed as to the status?who?s accepted or not, what decision might need
> to be made accordingly. No collective decision to change these
> long-standing transparent and inclusive procedures was taken.  But it seems
> that your model is that people provide input and then the two first moving
> facilitators go off and make the decisions, often informing the group only
> when pestered for answers.  This is really just not how it works, sorry.
>
> There are a number of outstanding choices to be made in filling out the
> panels.  Suggestions have been made by participants.  Let?s please follow
> the long-standing practice in making decisions from here.
>
> I reiterate for reference my suggestions of Jeanette and Samantha
> Dickinson as moderators, Larry Strickling (govt) and Geoff Huston (TC) for
> the ecosystem panel, and Jeremy Malcolm or Adam Peake (CS) for the IGF
> panel.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bill
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/da550f62/attachment.htm>

From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Fri Aug  8 05:39:46 2014
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 18:39:46 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpJLHVXU_4_k_GJ8x0i3ZLjzxzE8ZeBn3WiVkDFzpCTZVw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpJLHVXU_4_k_GJ8x0i3ZLjzxzE
	8ZeBn3WiVkDFzpCTZVw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <79EFD8D4-B9CB-40B9-8742-C31EE553D2AC@glocom.ac.jp>

Thanks Bill.

I'd be happy to help out, contribute if I can -- have some idea of WSIS/IGF/NETmundial.

But person I'd personally like to hear from is Marilaia Maciel.  She's been following most of the relevant activities, and very involved in coordinating the roadmap section of the NETmundial document (I spent more time on principles.)  I think there's been some misunderstanding about NETmundial's suggestions regarding the IGF, and she may put those straight. 

Adam



On Aug 8, 2014, at 5:54 PM, Subi Chaturvedi wrote:

> Bill I am glad that we are in agreement then. All your suggestions have duly incorporated.  And that is indeed the process followed. Respectfully, I disagree with your statement that any attempt is being made to do this in a manner which is top down. And it is unfair to constantly claim otherwise. All of us have multiple things to do and we're all doing this voluntarily. Yet we have neither discouraged any member from contributing nor have we ignored any inputs. I am aware of your immense expertise and contribution in this space. And we're all still learning. But this doesn't help. All constructive inputs are welcome. Like the IGF we do not want the IGF MAG to remain a decision making platform for a select few and by a select few. This would only result in a chilling effect for new MAG members, who are trying their best to contribute and create. It has been a constant effort to divest the aura of a club. 
> 
> We have sent out multiple calls for inputs and suggestions, invites to join calls. And when inputs have been received they have all been incorporated and responded to. You asked us to stop inviting speakers after our initial calls for specific names remained unresponded to, we did exactly that.  Sent out a fresh call again for inputs.
> 
> The people you have listed are indeed the people who have been approached as speakers. Geoff Huston from the technical community is a new and welcome addition. I do not have his contact details would be grateful if either you or Paul can connect us with him. 
> 
> You will recall my multiple emails on this list for specific inputs and threads and for seeking contact details including email ids and contact details of all the speakers, volunteers are recommending. 
> 
> Every single suggestion has been incorporated received from all MAG volunteers working on this session. 
> 
> Jeremy's emails seem to be bouncing back. Would be grateful if you can provide us an alternative mail. We have reached out to him multiple times at      jeremy at ciroap.org
> 
> Thank you again for actively contributing on this session. I look forward to any inputs that you might have further to make this session better and more meaningful.
>  
> regards
> 
> Subi
> 
> 
> 
> On 8 August 2014 13:56, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Subi
> 
> On Aug 8, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> This year as MAG members we then volunteered through a doodle poll for the mains on which we wished to contribute more actively than others.
>> 
>> Every session then had ranging from 1- 2 and sometimes 4 co-leads from amongst MAG members.
>> 
>> With about 16-18 volunteers per session.
>> 
>> Over several emails on the MAG list and individual calls and emails, inputs have been contributed. Every main has then gone on to organically synthesise these inputs. Some through a single mail and others through a series of continuous engagements. The water is being carried across different mains who have volunteered to coherently assimilate inputs received.
>> 
>> Once a call for inputs is put out regarding specific requests the co-leads generally wait within reason for specific inputs and specific threads and then for the purpose of delivery and operationalisation of actual logistical work  move the work along.
> 
> The problem here is what 'move the work along' means.  With respect to inviting panelists, the consistent, standard practice of the MAG over the past decade has been that the lead facilitators keep a running track of the list of suggested names (actually, I had to step in and do that here), pose choices to the group, people weigh in and the group reaches consensus, and then the facilitators reach out to speakers and keep the list continuously informed as to the status?who?s accepted or not, what decision might need to be made accordingly. No collective decision to change these long-standing transparent and inclusive procedures was taken.  But it seems that your model is that people provide input and then the two first moving facilitators go off and make the decisions, often informing the group only when pestered for answers.  This is really just not how it works, sorry.
> 
> There are a number of outstanding choices to be made in filling out the panels.  Suggestions have been made by participants.  Let?s please follow the long-standing practice in making decisions from here.
> 
> I reiterate for reference my suggestions of Jeanette and Samantha Dickinson as moderators, Larry Strickling (govt) and Geoff Huston (TC) for the ecosystem panel, and Jeremy Malcolm or Adam Peake (CS) for the IGF panel.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org




From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 05:42:50 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 15:12:50 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <79EFD8D4-B9CB-40B9-8742-C31EE553D2AC@glocom.ac.jp>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpJLHVXU_4_k_GJ8x0i3ZLjzxzE8ZeBn3WiVkDFzpCTZVw@mail.gmail.com>
	<79EFD8D4-B9CB-40B9-8742-C31EE553D2AC@glocom.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpJrk+xs1DD+qF=ZgKr4fCLu0m1F=RpJ98sTi7gB33Ro4A@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Adam. We were thinking Marilia would be great on the first session
and you would add tremendous value in the second half.

Would that be acceptable to you?

regards

Subi



On 8 August 2014 15:09, Adam <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:

> Thanks Bill.
>
> I'd be happy to help out, contribute if I can -- have some idea of
> WSIS/IGF/NETmundial.
>
> But person I'd personally like to hear from is Marilaia Maciel.  She's
> been following most of the relevant activities, and very involved in
> coordinating the roadmap section of the NETmundial document (I spent more
> time on principles.)  I think there's been some misunderstanding about
> NETmundial's suggestions regarding the IGF, and she may put those straight.
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> On Aug 8, 2014, at 5:54 PM, Subi Chaturvedi wrote:
>
> > Bill I am glad that we are in agreement then. All your suggestions have
> duly incorporated.  And that is indeed the process followed. Respectfully,
> I disagree with your statement that any attempt is being made to do this in
> a manner which is top down. And it is unfair to constantly claim otherwise.
> All of us have multiple things to do and we're all doing this voluntarily.
> Yet we have neither discouraged any member from contributing nor have we
> ignored any inputs. I am aware of your immense expertise and contribution
> in this space. And we're all still learning. But this doesn't help. All
> constructive inputs are welcome. Like the IGF we do not want the IGF MAG to
> remain a decision making platform for a select few and by a select few.
> This would only result in a chilling effect for new MAG members, who are
> trying their best to contribute and create. It has been a constant effort
> to divest the aura of a club.
> >
> > We have sent out multiple calls for inputs and suggestions, invites to
> join calls. And when inputs have been received they have all been
> incorporated and responded to. You asked us to stop inviting speakers after
> our initial calls for specific names remained unresponded to, we did
> exactly that.  Sent out a fresh call again for inputs.
> >
> > The people you have listed are indeed the people who have been
> approached as speakers. Geoff Huston from the technical community is a new
> and welcome addition. I do not have his contact details would be grateful
> if either you or Paul can connect us with him.
> >
> > You will recall my multiple emails on this list for specific inputs and
> threads and for seeking contact details including email ids and contact
> details of all the speakers, volunteers are recommending.
> >
> > Every single suggestion has been incorporated received from all MAG
> volunteers working on this session.
> >
> > Jeremy's emails seem to be bouncing back. Would be grateful if you can
> provide us an alternative mail. We have reached out to him multiple times
> at      jeremy at ciroap.org
> >
> > Thank you again for actively contributing on this session. I look
> forward to any inputs that you might have further to make this session
> better and more meaningful.
> >
> > regards
> >
> > Subi
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8 August 2014 13:56, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Subi
> >
> > On Aug 8, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> This year as MAG members we then volunteered through a doodle poll for
> the mains on which we wished to contribute more actively than others.
> >>
> >> Every session then had ranging from 1- 2 and sometimes 4 co-leads from
> amongst MAG members.
> >>
> >> With about 16-18 volunteers per session.
> >>
> >> Over several emails on the MAG list and individual calls and emails,
> inputs have been contributed. Every main has then gone on to organically
> synthesise these inputs. Some through a single mail and others through a
> series of continuous engagements. The water is being carried across
> different mains who have volunteered to coherently assimilate inputs
> received.
> >>
> >> Once a call for inputs is put out regarding specific requests the
> co-leads generally wait within reason for specific inputs and specific
> threads and then for the purpose of delivery and operationalisation of
> actual logistical work  move the work along.
> >
> > The problem here is what 'move the work along' means.  With respect to
> inviting panelists, the consistent, standard practice of the MAG over the
> past decade has been that the lead facilitators keep a running track of the
> list of suggested names (actually, I had to step in and do that here), pose
> choices to the group, people weigh in and the group reaches consensus, and
> then the facilitators reach out to speakers and keep the list continuously
> informed as to the status?who?s accepted or not, what decision might need
> to be made accordingly. No collective decision to change these
> long-standing transparent and inclusive procedures was taken.  But it seems
> that your model is that people provide input and then the two first moving
> facilitators go off and make the decisions, often informing the group only
> when pestered for answers.  This is really just not how it works, sorry.
> >
> > There are a number of outstanding choices to be made in filling out the
> panels.  Suggestions have been made by participants.  Let?s please follow
> the long-standing practice in making decisions from here.
> >
> > I reiterate for reference my suggestions of Jeanette and Samantha
> Dickinson as moderators, Larry Strickling (govt) and Geoff Huston (TC) for
> the ecosystem panel, and Jeremy Malcolm or Adam Peake (CS) for the IGF
> panel.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> > Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> >
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/575444e2/attachment.htm>

From wjdrake at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 05:59:10 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 11:59:10 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpJLHVXU_4_k_GJ8x0i3ZLjzxzE8ZeBn3WiVkDFzpCTZVw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpJLHVXU_4_k_GJ8x0i3ZLjzxzE8ZeBn3WiVkDFzpCTZVw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <08F17DC2-C542-4FFE-AACA-7DCC03F8B0C2@gmail.com>

Hi Subi

On Aug 8, 2014, at 10:54 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:

> Bill I am glad that we are in agreement then. All your suggestions have duly incorporated.  And that is indeed the process followed. Respectfully, I disagree with your statement that any attempt is being made to do this in a manner which is top down.
> And it is unfair to constantly claim otherwise.

I have never characterized it as top down. I accurately described the process being followed, about which others have expressed concern as well.  

> All of us have multiple things to do and we're all doing this voluntarily.

Yes and it has taken quite a lot of my time to try to get information about this session organized and divulged in a manner that would allow the group to know what?s going on and participate in the decision making.  I don?t actually have time for this and shouldn?t have had to do it.

> Yet we have neither discouraged any member from contributing nor have we ignored any inputs. I am aware of your immense expertise and contribution in this space. And we're all still learning. But this doesn't help.

I think it has, clearly. When I sent my first message asking what?s going on on July 8 there?d been no word from you to the list since April 16, and apparently you?d already invited speakers without any group consensus that yes, let?s invite those speakers.  Now we are finally getting some group discussion, although I suspect the unfortunately needed procedural debate may be dampening enthusiasms.  Hopefully we can now transcend those and complete the panels etc. in a collaborative manner.

> All constructive inputs are welcome. Like the IGF we do not want the IGF MAG to remain a decision making platform for a select few and by a select few.

Precisely, and this is why we do MAG+ planning groups for the main sessions.

> This would only result in a chilling effect for new MAG members, who are trying their best to contribute and create. It has been a constant effort to divest the aura of a club. 
> 
> We have sent out multiple calls for inputs and suggestions, invites to join calls. And when inputs have been received they have all been incorporated and responded to. You asked us to stop inviting speakers after our initial calls for specific names remained unresponded to, we did exactly that.  Sent out a fresh call again for inputs.
> 
> The people you have listed are indeed the people who have been approached as speakers.

My suggestions are just my suggestions, maybe someone here would prefer alternatives.  So the right process would be to ask if people agree with xyz and if it?s yes or simply no disagreements expressed after an interval we say ok let?s invite.

> Geoff Huston from the technical community is a new and welcome addition. I do not have his contact details would be grateful if either you or Paul can connect us with him. 

Geoff Huston <gih at apnic.net>
> 
> You will recall my multiple emails on this list for specific inputs and threads and for seeking contact details including email ids and contact details of all the speakers, volunteers are recommending. 
> 
> Every single suggestion has been incorporated received from all MAG volunteers working on this session. 

Yes, the list of names I compiled from peoples? suggestions and sent yesterday had 28 names, not counting those who were confirmed previously.  But obviously we can?t accommodate them all, so group discussion and choices are needed.
> 
> Jeremy's emails seem to be bouncing back. Would be grateful if you can provide us an alternative mail. We have reached out to him multiple times at      jeremy at ciroap.org

He works at EFF, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org>
> 
> Thank you again for actively contributing on this session. I look forward to any inputs that you might have further to make this session better and more meaningful.

Thanks, your contributions are appreciated too.  I am just asking that we follow the usual procedures, full stop.

Cheers

Bill
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 8 August 2014 13:56, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Subi
> 
> On Aug 8, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> This year as MAG members we then volunteered through a doodle poll for the mains on which we wished to contribute more actively than others.
>> 
>> Every session then had ranging from 1- 2 and sometimes 4 co-leads from amongst MAG members.
>> 
>> With about 16-18 volunteers per session.
>> 
>> Over several emails on the MAG list and individual calls and emails, inputs have been contributed. Every main has then gone on to organically synthesise these inputs. Some through a single mail and others through a series of continuous engagements. The water is being carried across different mains who have volunteered to coherently assimilate inputs received.
>> 
>> Once a call for inputs is put out regarding specific requests the co-leads generally wait within reason for specific inputs and specific threads and then for the purpose of delivery and operationalisation of actual logistical work  move the work along.
> 
> The problem here is what 'move the work along' means.  With respect to inviting panelists, the consistent, standard practice of the MAG over the past decade has been that the lead facilitators keep a running track of the list of suggested names (actually, I had to step in and do that here), pose choices to the group, people weigh in and the group reaches consensus, and then the facilitators reach out to speakers and keep the list continuously informed as to the status?who?s accepted or not, what decision might need to be made accordingly. No collective decision to change these long-standing transparent and inclusive procedures was taken.  But it seems that your model is that people provide input and then the two first moving facilitators go off and make the decisions, often informing the group only when pestered for answers.  This is really just not how it works, sorry.
> 
> There are a number of outstanding choices to be made in filling out the panels.  Suggestions have been made by participants.  Let?s please follow the long-standing practice in making decisions from here.
> 
> I reiterate for reference my suggestions of Jeanette and Samantha Dickinson as moderators, Larry Strickling (govt) and Geoff Huston (TC) for the ecosystem panel, and Jeremy Malcolm or Adam Peake (CS) for the IGF panel.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/a9c46f6b/attachment.htm>

From avri at acm.org  Fri Aug  8 06:08:11 2014
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 06:08:11 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org>
	<53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org>
	<53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53E4A18B.2040400@acm.org>

Hi,

Ah well if all has been decided and you have already given up the
opportunity to work on improving the IGF based on NETMundial, that's too
bad.  I had thought that this had been the purpose of this session.

Sad to see IGF walk away from yet another a chance to improve.


avri


On 08-Aug-14 02:15, Subi Chaturvedi wrote:
> Also Avri thank you for your inputs. Always helpful. But changing the
> title to Evol Internet Governance Ecosystem - a response to Netmundial
> for this main might not be feasible because it has speakers from WEF,
> UNCSD, UNESCO, WSIS and other parallel IG processes as well. The second
> part is about the role of IGF and Strengthening IGF so the new title now
> will incorporate both these aspects.



From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 06:16:02 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 15:46:02 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E4A18B.2040400@acm.org>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E4A18B.2040400@acm.org>
Message-ID: <CANRKRp+V2=R=D_zsa3e4wmYBrpX46ySuUqnMuN4r=w-5GZrfKQ@mail.gmail.com>

Not at all Avri. Netmundial has indeed inspired this and us all. It showed
us that a lot was possible.

It's just the topic that's all. Since this is about all the other process
and a substantive part of it is about strengthening the IGF just though it
might be a misnomer for the session.


Which is why about 4 respondents/panelists invited for this session are
those who have been formative and key drivers of Netmundial.

We are not wedded to the topic.  It should just adequately capture what the
session is about. If everyone feels we should change it, we can then all
make that suggestion to the secretariat.


We're open to suggestions and nothing is cast in stone.

This session is also the space for responding to the suggestions which came
organically for improving the IGF at Netmundial. So every intent is to keep
it aligned with what you are suggesting.

Comments are invited on the topic by others as well. But do please let us
know by the end of the day.

regards

Subi




On 8 August 2014 15:38, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Ah well if all has been decided and you have already given up the
> opportunity to work on improving the IGF based on NETMundial, that's too
> bad.  I had thought that this had been the purpose of this session.
>
> Sad to see IGF walk away from yet another a chance to improve.
>
>
> avri
>
>
> On 08-Aug-14 02:15, Subi Chaturvedi wrote:
> > Also Avri thank you for your inputs. Always helpful. But changing the
> > title to Evol Internet Governance Ecosystem - a response to Netmundial
> > for this main might not be feasible because it has speakers from WEF,
> > UNCSD, UNESCO, WSIS and other parallel IG processes as well. The second
> > part is about the role of IGF and Strengthening IGF so the new title now
> > will incorporate both these aspects.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/c176d943/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 06:27:14 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 15:57:14 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <08F17DC2-C542-4FFE-AACA-7DCC03F8B0C2@gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpJLHVXU_4_k_GJ8x0i3ZLjzxzE8ZeBn3WiVkDFzpCTZVw@mail.gmail.com>
	<08F17DC2-C542-4FFE-AACA-7DCC03F8B0C2@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpKE7pj_oWpnxmNcxFF20P=-3HdwacC0AfW5t6dzN=MTSg@mail.gmail.com>

Thank Bill. Its good to have specific contact details.

When we posted the original list it didn't have 28 names but did have about
21.

Additionally we sought inputs on policy questions key threads topic and
framing.

We wrote multiple emails asking for inputs on that list. Suggested thread.
I do not want to clutter this list with trails but you would recall them
since you have actively contributed to them. Initial invited to heads of
organisations were only sent out keeping their calendars in mind, after
multiple discussion and a basic agreement that these were indeed the
processes which we would like to see represented. Since we had no clarity/
agreement on the format we didn't reach out to any stakeholders.

Specific inputs always help. Just as yours are doing now. On the virtual
call we then requested a timeline from the secretariat. Which was then
given for all the mains.  A fresh call for inputs was circulated again. And
you have been most helpful in compiling names and keeping our memory
refreshed. But we ageing sought specific recommendations. Different
volunteers will recall. Those who sent the names with co-ordinates have
been invited. Which is how I see all the other sessions working. And some
not.

And you're right, none of us have the time to wrest inputs out from each
other. Since we're all responsible adults here who are equally committed
for a common objective.

What would be of tremendous help is an indication of a reasonable time that
one should wait or an indication of an exact time frame that should elapse
within reason to assume that everyone is in agreement. Since we do have a
program to deliver. I completely agree that the process should be inclusive
and should be standardised for all the mains.

It would help us make it better for next year's IGF as well. And I do
believe there's a review on. The number of times a call was put out for
each main session. People who contributed and how. Let's also do a self
review as members of the MAG while we're doing one for the IGF as we speak.

Or would you prefer individual emails be sent to all the volunteers ? we'd
be happy to do that as well. As we have done in the past.

It's voluntary working and we're all doing the best we can.

Regards

Subi




On 8 August 2014 15:29, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Subi
>
> On Aug 8, 2014, at 10:54 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Bill I am glad that we are in agreement then. All your suggestions have
> duly incorporated.  And that is indeed the process followed. Respectfully,
> I disagree with your statement that any attempt is being made to do this in
> a manner which is top down.
>
> And it is unfair to constantly claim otherwise.
>
>
> I have never characterized it as top down. I accurately described the
> process being followed, about which others have expressed concern as well.
>
> All of us have multiple things to do and we're all doing this voluntarily.
>
>
> Yes and it has taken quite a lot of my time to try to get information
> about this session organized and divulged in a manner that would allow the
> group to know what?s going on and participate in the decision making.  I
> don?t actually have time for this and shouldn?t have had to do it.
>
> Yet we have neither discouraged any member from contributing nor have we
> ignored any inputs. I am aware of your immense expertise and contribution
> in this space. And we're all still learning. But this doesn't help.
>
>
> I think it has, clearly. When I sent my first message asking what?s going
> on on July 8 there?d been no word from you to the list since April 16, and
> apparently you?d already invited speakers without any group consensus that
> yes, let?s invite those speakers.  Now we are finally getting some group
> discussion, although I suspect the unfortunately needed procedural debate
> may be dampening enthusiasms.  Hopefully we can now transcend those and
> complete the panels etc. in a collaborative manner.
>
> All constructive inputs are welcome. Like the IGF we do not want the IGF
> MAG to remain a decision making platform for a select few and by a select
> few.
>
>
> Precisely, and this is why we do MAG+ planning groups for the main
> sessions.
>
> This would only result in a chilling effect for new MAG members, who are
> trying their best to contribute and create. It has been a constant effort
> to divest the aura of a club.
>
> We have sent out multiple calls for inputs and suggestions, invites to
> join calls. And when inputs have been received they have all been
> incorporated and responded to. You asked us to stop inviting speakers after
> our initial calls for specific names remained unresponded to, we did
> exactly that.  Sent out a fresh call again for inputs.
>
> The people you have listed are indeed the people who have been approached
> as speakers.
>
>
> My suggestions are just my suggestions, maybe someone here would prefer
> alternatives.  So the right process would be to ask if people agree with
> xyz and if it?s yes or simply no disagreements expressed after an interval
> we say ok let?s invite.
>
> Geoff Huston from the technical community is a new and welcome addition. I
> do not have his contact details would be grateful if either you or Paul can
> connect us with him.
>
>
> Geoff Huston <gih at apnic.net>
>
>
> You will recall my multiple emails on this list for specific inputs and
> threads and for seeking contact details including email ids and contact
> details of all the speakers, volunteers are recommending.
>
> Every single suggestion has been incorporated received from all MAG
> volunteers working on this session.
>
>
> Yes, the list of names I compiled from peoples? suggestions and sent
> yesterday had 28 names, not counting those who were confirmed previously.
>  But obviously we can?t accommodate them all, so group discussion and
> choices are needed.
>
>
> Jeremy's emails seem to be bouncing back. Would be grateful if you can
> provide us an alternative mail. We have reached out to him multiple times
> at      jeremy at ciroap.org
>
>
> He works at EFF, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org>
>
>
> Thank you again for actively contributing on this session. I look forward
> to any inputs that you might have further to make this session better and
> more meaningful.
>
>
> Thanks, your contributions are appreciated too.  I am just asking that we
> follow the usual procedures, full stop.
>
> Cheers
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 8 August 2014 13:56, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Subi
>>
>> On Aug 8, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> This year as MAG members we then volunteered through a doodle poll for
>> the mains on which we wished to contribute more actively than others.
>>
>> Every session then had ranging from 1- 2 and sometimes 4 co-leads from
>> amongst MAG members.
>>
>> With about 16-18 volunteers per session.
>>
>> Over several emails on the MAG list and individual calls and emails,
>> inputs have been contributed. Every main has then gone on to
>> organically synthesise these inputs. Some through a single mail and others
>> through a series of continuous engagements. The water is being
>> carried across different mains who have volunteered to coherently
>> assimilate inputs received.
>>
>> Once a call for inputs is put out regarding specific requests the
>> co-leads generally wait within reason for specific inputs and specific
>> threads and then for the purpose of delivery and operationalisation of
>> actual logistical work  move the work along.
>>
>>
>> The problem here is what 'move the work along' means.  With respect to
>> inviting panelists, the consistent, standard practice of the MAG over the
>> past decade has been that the lead facilitators keep a running track of the
>> list of suggested names (actually, I had to step in and do that here), pose
>> choices to the group, people weigh in and the group reaches consensus, and
>> then the facilitators reach out to speakers and keep the list continuously
>> informed as to the status?who?s accepted or not, what decision might need
>> to be made accordingly. No collective decision to change these
>> long-standing transparent and inclusive procedures was taken.  But it seems
>> that your model is that people provide input and then the two first moving
>> facilitators go off and make the decisions, often informing the group only
>> when pestered for answers.  This is really just not how it works, sorry.
>>
>> There are a number of outstanding choices to be made in filling out the
>> panels.  Suggestions have been made by participants.  Let?s please follow
>> the long-standing practice in making decisions from here.
>>
>> I reiterate for reference my suggestions of Jeanette and Samantha
>> Dickinson as moderators, Larry Strickling (govt) and Geoff Huston (TC) for
>> the ecosystem panel, and Jeremy Malcolm or Adam Peake (CS) for the IGF
>> panel.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/9b466ff9/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 06:38:18 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 16:08:18 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <kw287iq61mx23hnh0fwyta19.1407408884092@email.android.com>
References: <kw287iq61mx23hnh0fwyta19.1407408884092@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpLK8g-xYGNCBPY2xMh+XRyw4SJFgaNT_9D1sDYZ_e4ibw@mail.gmail.com>

Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew from the
state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making an intervention
from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn.

Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the first
half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA transition. If
the others are in agreement than your help in approaching him would be very
welcome.

Regards

Subi




On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov> wrote:

>  I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a
> possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted regarding
> this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government speaker please
> let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: William Drake
> Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
> To: evolintgov2014
> Cc: MAG-public
> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
> IG Ecosystem-Update
>
>  Hi
>
>  I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this
> session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all
> names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The
> last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been
> no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which
> panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a
> few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their
> colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people
> invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old
> fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated
> in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and
> got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s
> progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid
> conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
>
>
>  *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session: Evolution
> of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial +
> CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose
> the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover everything
> happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc etc.
>
>  *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
>
> *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>
>
>  *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>       [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>
> Moderator: TBD
>
> Panelists:
>
> 1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
> 2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
> 3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>
> *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>
> 1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
> 2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>
>
>  Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now):
>
>    - Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
>    - Sam Dickinson (TC)
>
>
>  Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members for
> now):
>
>  Government/IGO:
>
>    - Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>    - Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel
>    1?)
>    - Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>
>
>    - Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>    - Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>    - Larry Strickling (US)
>    - Ed Vaizy (UK)
>    - Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>    - Alice Munyua (AU)
>
>  Private Sector:
>
>    - Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>    - Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>    - Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>    - Phil Rushton (BT)
>    - Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>
>  Technical Community:
>
>    - Jari Arkko (IETF)
>    - Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>    - Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>    - Byron Holland (CIRA)
>    - Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>    - Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>
>  Civil Society:
>
>    - Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>    - Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>    - Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>    - Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>    - Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>    - Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>    - Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>    - Adam Peake (Glocom)
>
>
>  Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>
>  Bill
>
>  On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>
>  regards
>
>  Subi
>
>
> On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>
>> Subi,
>>
>>  apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>
>>  *Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland*
>>
>> *Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in European
>> affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt with the
>> implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda, including
>> e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of
>> Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues
>> surrounding **Internet governance and advocacy of the **multistakeholder*
>>  *approach* *have been treated with top priority by the Polish
>> government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference and creation
>> of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.*
>>
>>  It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:
>> Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>>
>>  Best
>> Igor
>>
>>
>>  On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  Many thanks Igor.
>>
>> Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>
>> Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Subi
>>
>>
>>  On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>> >
>> > Dear All,
>> >
>> > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of Administration
>> and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well
>> >
>> > Best
>> > Igor
>> >
>> >
>> > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Dear All,
>> >>
>> >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>> >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their
>> availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>> >>
>> >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's
>> participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out
>> previously.
>> >>
>> >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and
>> Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from
>> Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will
>> be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross
>> stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>> >>
>> >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>> >>
>> >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>> >>
>> >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy
>> questions.
>> >>
>> >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>> >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum
>> time for participation and interventions from the floor and non
>> facilitators.
>> >> 2. Format:
>> >> A-no moderator
>> >> B-4 moderators
>> >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then abt
>> 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each of
>> the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>> >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience
>> interventions only
>> >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>> >> D. An open space
>> >>
>> >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>> >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs
>> have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting
>> speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their
>> calenders)
>> >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self
>> nominations.  So we have them too.
>> >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>> >>
>> >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth
>> volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to
>> nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet
>> values will have some.
>> >>
>> >> Any other inputs.
>> >>
>> >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact
>> Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>> >>
>> >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >>
>> >> Subi
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> >>
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/4af30095/attachment.htm>

From FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov  Fri Aug  8 06:50:51 2014
From: FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov (Fiona Alexander)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 06:50:51 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
Message-ID: <8gwtpfkqvg1hlxrcnv1l0vs0.1407495049574@email.android.com>

I will check back with my USG colleagues but what is the difference between being on the panel and an intervention?

As a general matter,  at some point the MAG will need to look across the package of main sessions to ensure diversity of speakers.   Seems to be a lot of familiar names, multiple times.  Not for now, but perhaps the next cycle the MAG should consider developing main session guidelines.


-------- Original message --------
From: Subi Chaturvedi
Date:08/08/2014 6:39 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: Fiona Alexander
Cc: evolintgov2014 , MAG-public , Marilyn Cade
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew from the state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making an intervention from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn.

Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the first half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA transition. If the others are in agreement than your help in approaching him would be very welcome.

Regards

Subi




On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov<mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.


-------- Original message --------
From: William Drake
Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: evolintgov2014
Cc: MAG-public
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

Hi

I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...


Session title: As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc etc.

Descriptive text: what?s in the program paper seems dated.

Speakers/Moderators: [is the below still current?]


Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem*
      [including per Janis the NM Initiative]

Moderator: TBD

Panelists:

1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]

Panel 2: The Role of the IGF

1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]


Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now):

 *   Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
 *   Sam Dickinson (TC)

Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members for now):

Government/IGO:

 *   Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
 *   Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel 1?)
 *   Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)

 *   Norberto Berner (Argentina)
 *   Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
 *   Larry Strickling (US)
 *   Ed Vaizy (UK)
 *   Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
 *   Alice Munyua (AU)

Private Sector:

 *   Danil Kerimi (WEF)
 *   Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
 *   Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
 *   Phil Rushton (BT)
 *   Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)

Technical Community:

 *   Jari Arkko (IETF)
 *   Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
 *   Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
 *   Byron Holland (CIRA)
 *   Geoff Huston (APNIC)
 *   Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)

Civil Society:

 *   Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
 *   Stephanie Perrin (UT)
 *   Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
 *   Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
 *   Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
 *   Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
 *   Marilia Maciel (FGV)
 *   Adam Peake (Glocom)

Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?

Bill

On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:


Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.

regards

Subi


On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
Subi,

apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:

Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland
Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding Internet governance and advocacy of the multistakeholder approach have been treated with top priority by the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.

It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:  Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl<mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>

Best
Igor


On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:


Many thanks Igor.

Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.

Collecting it for all the speakers.

Regards

Subi



On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well
>
> Best
> Igor
>
>
> On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>
>> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out previously.
>>
>> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>
>> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>>
>> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>
>> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy questions.
>>
>> Suggestions pertaining to :
>> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum time for participation and interventions from the floor and non facilitators.
>> 2. Format:
>> A-no moderator
>> B-4 moderators
>> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience interventions only
>> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>> D. An open space
>>
>> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
>> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self nominations.  So we have them too.
>> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>
>> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>>
>> Any other inputs.
>>
>> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>
>> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Subi
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>


_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/b3e6e491/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 06:53:17 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 16:23:17 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <8gwtpfkqvg1hlxrcnv1l0vs0.1407495049574@email.android.com>
References: <8gwtpfkqvg1hlxrcnv1l0vs0.1407495049574@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpJX57+DUDDkfpT4Mz8pG7k8ueZA2zJ94uCpioAshf1bDw@mail.gmail.com>

thanks Fiona. Agree. Will await your response.

regards

Subi




On 8 August 2014 16:20, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov> wrote:

>  I will check back with my USG colleagues but what is the difference
> between being on the panel and an intervention?
>
>  As a general matter,  at some point the MAG will need to look across the
> package of main sessions to ensure diversity of speakers.   Seems to be a
> lot of familiar names, multiple times.  Not for now, but perhaps the next
> cycle the MAG should consider developing main session guidelines.
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Subi Chaturvedi
> Date:08/08/2014 6:39 AM (GMT-05:00)
> To: Fiona Alexander
> Cc: evolintgov2014 , MAG-public  , Marilyn Cade
> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
> IG Ecosystem-Update
>
>  Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew from the
> state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making an intervention
> from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn.
>
>  Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the first
> half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA transition. If
> the others are in agreement than your help in approaching him would be very
> welcome.
>
>  Regards
>
>  Subi
>
>
>
>
> On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov> wrote:
>
>> I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a
>> possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted regarding
>> this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government speaker please
>> let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>>
>>
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: William Drake
>> Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
>> To: evolintgov2014
>> Cc: MAG-public
>> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution
>> of IG Ecosystem-Update
>>
>>  Hi
>>
>>  I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this
>> session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all
>> names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The
>> last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been
>> no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which
>> panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a
>> few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their
>> colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people
>> invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old
>> fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated
>> in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and
>> got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s
>> progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid
>> conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
>>
>>
>>  *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session:
>> Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to
>> NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might
>> want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover
>> everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc
>> etc.
>>
>>  *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
>>
>> *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>>
>>
>>  *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>>       [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>>
>> Moderator: TBD
>>
>> Panelists:
>>
>> 1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
>> 2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
>> 3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>>
>> *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>>
>> 1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
>> 2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>>
>>
>>  Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now):
>>
>>    - Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
>>    - Sam Dickinson (TC)
>>
>>
>>  Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members
>> for now):
>>
>>  Government/IGO:
>>
>>    - Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>>    - Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel
>>    1?)
>>    - Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>>
>>
>>    - Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>>    - Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>>    - Larry Strickling (US)
>>    - Ed Vaizy (UK)
>>    - Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>>    - Alice Munyua (AU)
>>
>>  Private Sector:
>>
>>    - Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>>    - Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>>    - Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>>    - Phil Rushton (BT)
>>    - Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>>
>>  Technical Community:
>>
>>    - Jari Arkko (IETF)
>>    - Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>>    - Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>>    - Byron Holland (CIRA)
>>    - Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>>    - Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>>
>>  Civil Society:
>>
>>    - Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>>    - Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>>    - Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>>    - Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>>    - Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>>    - Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>>    - Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>>    - Adam Peake (Glocom)
>>
>>
>>  Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>>
>>  Bill
>>
>>  On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>>
>>  regards
>>
>>  Subi
>>
>>
>> On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>>
>>> Subi,
>>>
>>>  apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>>
>>>  *Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland*
>>>
>>> *Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in
>>> European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt
>>> with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda,
>>> including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of
>>> Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues
>>> surrounding **Internet governance and advocacy of the *
>>> *multistakeholder* *approach* *have been treated with top priority by
>>> the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference
>>> and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.*
>>>
>>>  It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:
>>> Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>>>
>>>  Best
>>> Igor
>>>
>>>
>>>  On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Many thanks Igor.
>>>
>>> Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>
>>> Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Subi
>>>
>>>
>>>  On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Dear All,
>>> >
>>> > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of
>>> Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well
>>> >
>>> > Best
>>> > Igor
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <
>>> subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Dear All,
>>> >>
>>> >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>> >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their
>>> availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>> >>
>>> >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's
>>> participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out
>>> previously.
>>> >>
>>> >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and
>>> Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from
>>> Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will
>>> be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross
>>> stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>> >>
>>> >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>>> >>
>>> >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>> >>
>>> >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy
>>> questions.
>>> >>
>>> >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>> >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum
>>> time for participation and interventions from the floor and non
>>> facilitators.
>>> >> 2. Format:
>>> >> A-no moderator
>>> >> B-4 moderators
>>> >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then
>>> abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each
>>> of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>>> >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience
>>> interventions only
>>> >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>> >> D. An open space
>>> >>
>>> >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>> >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs
>>> have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting
>>> speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their
>>> calenders)
>>> >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self
>>> nominations.  So we have them too.
>>> >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>> >>
>>> >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth
>>> volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to
>>> nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet
>>> values will have some.
>>> >>
>>> >> Any other inputs.
>>> >>
>>> >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact
>>> Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>> >>
>>> >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards
>>> >>
>>> >> Subi
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>> >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>>> >>
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/8355db97/attachment.htm>

From jeanette at wzb.eu  Fri Aug  8 06:55:50 2014
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:55:50 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <8gwtpfkqvg1hlxrcnv1l0vs0.1407495049574@email.android.com>
References: <8gwtpfkqvg1hlxrcnv1l0vs0.1407495049574@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <53E4ACB6.3030309@wzb.eu>

Hi Fiona,

since we have such an impressive choice of names, why not go for those 
experts who are not engaged in other main sessions. I think there is 
still enough time to avoid double booking.

I also like the idea of guidelines for the operative business of the 
MAG. It seems there is no good oral memory of procedures that have 
worked well and those that are better avoided.
Jeanette

Am 08.08.2014 12:50, schrieb Fiona Alexander:
> I will check back with my USG colleagues but what is the difference
> between being on the panel and an intervention?
>
> As a general matter,  at some point the MAG will need to look across the
> package of main sessions to ensure diversity of speakers.   Seems to be
> a lot of familiar names, multiple times.  Not for now, but perhaps the
> next cycle the MAG should consider developing main session guidelines.
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Subi Chaturvedi
> Date:08/08/2014 6:39 AM (GMT-05:00)
> To: Fiona Alexander
> Cc: evolintgov2014 , MAG-public , Marilyn Cade
> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution
> of IG Ecosystem-Update
>
> Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew from the
> state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making an
> intervention from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn.
>
> Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the first
> half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA transition.
> If the others are in agreement than your help in approaching him would
> be very welcome.
>
> Regards
>
> Subi
>
>
>
>
> On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov
> <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
>
>     I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a
>     possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted
>     regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US
>     Government speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>
>
>     -------- Original message --------
>     From: William Drake __
>     Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
>     To: evolintgov2014 __
>     Cc: MAG-public __
>     Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session -
>     Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
>
>     Hi
>
>     I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this
>     session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of
>     all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two
>     panels.  The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.
>       Since then there?s been no collective discussion about options and
>     who might be optimal on which panel. There have been a references to
>     bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG members for
>     speaking slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit
>     awkward), and a few confirmations that people invited previously
>     have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but
>     all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in over
>     the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and got
>     to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this
>     one?s progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a
>     solid conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
>
>
>     *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session:
>     Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF -
>     Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit
>     awkward, we might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to
>     expanding it to cover everything happening in the wider environment,
>     e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc etc.
>
>     *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
>
>     *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>
>
>     *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>            [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>
>     Moderator: TBD
>
>     Panelists:
>
>     1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
>     2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
>     3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>
>     *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>
>     1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
>     2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>
>
>     Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now):
>
>       * Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
>       * Sam Dickinson (TC)
>
>
>     Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members
>     for now):
>
>     Government/IGO:
>
>       * Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>       * Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for
>         panel 1?)
>       * Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>
>       * Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>       * Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>       * Larry Strickling (US)
>       * Ed Vaizy (UK)
>       * Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>       * Alice Munyua (AU)
>
>     Private Sector:
>
>       * Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>       * Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>       * Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>       * Phil Rushton (BT)
>       * Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>
>     Technical Community:
>
>       * Jari Arkko (IETF)
>       * Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>       * Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>       * Byron Holland (CIRA)
>       * Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>       * Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>
>     Civil Society:
>
>       * Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>       * Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>       * Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>       * Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>       * Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>       * Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>       * Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>       * Adam Peake (Glocom)
>
>
>     Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>
>     Bill
>
>     On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>     <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>>
>>     Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>>
>>     regards
>>
>>     Subi
>>
>>
>>     On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
>>     <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>
>>         Subi,
>>
>>         apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>
>>         /Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland///
>>
>>         /Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing
>>         in European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament,
>>         where he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and
>>         European Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy
>>         issues. Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and
>>         Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding
>>         //Internet governance and advocacy of the //multistakeholder/
>>         /approach/ /have been treated with top priority by the Polish
>>         government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference
>>         and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent
>>         activities./
>>
>>
>>         It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:
>>         Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>>         <mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>
>>
>>         Best
>>         Igor
>>
>>
>>         On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>         <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>>
>>         wrote:
>>
>>>         Many thanks Igor.
>>>
>>>         Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>
>>>         Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>
>>>         Regards
>>>
>>>         Subi
>>>
>>>
>>>         On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
>>>         <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>>         >
>>>         > Dear All,
>>>         >
>>>         > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of
>>>         Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his
>>>         availability as well
>>>         >
>>>         > Best
>>>         > Igor
>>>         >
>>>         >
>>>         > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>         <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>>
>>>         wrote:
>>>         >
>>>         >> Dear All,
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>>         >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed
>>>         their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-;
>>>         Technical Community.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your
>>>         organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails
>>>         which were sent out previously.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and
>>>         Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs along with
>>>         substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga,
>>>         Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the call today
>>>         but we have a wide pool of options from accross stakeholder
>>>         groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> All of them have been metaculously documented across
>>>         several emails.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format
>>>         and policy questions.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>>         >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep
>>>         maximum time for participation and interventions from the
>>>         floor and non facilitators.
>>>         >> 2. Format:
>>>         >> A-no moderator
>>>         >> B-4 moderators
>>>         >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each
>>>         and then abt 40 minute long interventions from different
>>>         stakeholder groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80
>>>         interventions.
>>>         >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic
>>>         with audience interventions only
>>>         >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>>         >> D. An open space
>>>         >>
>>>         >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>>         >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week,
>>>         since inputs have been received on session format the
>>>         moratorium imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be
>>>         lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
>>>         >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self
>>>         nominations.  So we have them too.
>>>         >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling
>>>         with youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session?
>>>         Would they like to nominate some? Participants from the
>>>         Dynamic Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Any other inputs.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free
>>>         and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Regards
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Subi
>>>         >>
>>>         >> _______________________________________________
>>>         >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>>         >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>>>         >>
>>>         http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>>         >
>>>         >
>>>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Igfmaglist mailing list
>     Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>     http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>



From mshears at cdt.org  Fri Aug  8 06:59:53 2014
From: mshears at cdt.org (Matthew Shears)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 11:59:53 +0100
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <8gwtpfkqvg1hlxrcnv1l0vs0.1407495049574@email.android.com>
References: <8gwtpfkqvg1hlxrcnv1l0vs0.1407495049574@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <53E4ADA9.3080108@cdt.org>

On Fiona's second point about familiar names...  Could we please try and 
have some _new voices_ in this session?  No disrespect but I see the 
same names from so many related panels in the past - greater diversity 
would help with this session and the IGF's overall credibility.

Matthew

On 8/8/2014 11:50 AM, Fiona Alexander wrote:
> I will check back with my USG colleagues but what is the difference 
> between being on the panel and an intervention?
>
> As a general matter,  at some point the MAG will need to look across 
> the package of main sessions to ensure diversity of speakers.   Seems 
> to be a lot of familiar names, multiple times.  Not for now, but 
> perhaps the next cycle the MAG should consider developing main session 
> guidelines.
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Subi Chaturvedi
> Date:08/08/2014 6:39 AM (GMT-05:00)
> To: Fiona Alexander
> Cc: evolintgov2014 , MAG-public , Marilyn Cade
> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - 
> Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
>
> Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew from 
> the state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making an 
> intervention from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn.
>
> Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the 
> first half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA 
> transition. If the others are in agreement than your help in 
> approaching him would be very welcome.
>
> Regards
>
> Subi
>
>
>
>
> On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov 
> <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
>
>     I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a
>     possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted
>     regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US
>     Government speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>
>
>     -------- Original message --------
>     From: William Drake
>     Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
>     To: evolintgov2014
>     Cc: MAG-public
>     Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session -
>     Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
>
>     Hi
>
>     I must admit I'm rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this
>     session?   I'd previously compiled and sent a few times the list
>     of all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two
>     panels.  The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.
>      Since then there's been no collective discussion about options
>     and who might be optimal on which panel. There have been a
>     references to bilateral private conversations, a few requests by
>     MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their colleagues
>     (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people
>     invited previously have agreed to participate.  I'm sorry for
>     being old fashioned but all previous main session planning groups
>     I've participated in over the years worked in a more transparent
>     and participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I just
>     don't know how to track this one's progress.  It would be good if
>     we could move this forward to a solid conclusion on a consensual
>     basis.  We are behind schedule...
>
>
>     *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session:
>     Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF -
>     Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora" seems a bit
>     awkward, we might want to lose the subtitle, unless we're going to
>     expanding it to cover everything happening in the wider
>     environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc etc.
>
>     *Descriptive text:* what's in the program paper seems dated.
>
>     *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>
>
>     *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>         [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>
>     Moderator: TBD
>
>     Panelists:
>
>     1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
>     2. Hamadoun Toure' (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
>     3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>
>     *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>
>     1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
>     2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>
>
>     Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now):
>
>       * Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
>       * Sam Dickinson (TC)
>
>
>     Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG
>     members for now):
>
>     Government/IGO:
>
>       * Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)...for which panel?]
>       * Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to
>         Igor...for panel 1?)
>       * Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>
>       * Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>       * Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>       * Larry Strickling (US)
>       * Ed Vaizy (UK)
>       * Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>       * Alice Munyua (AU)
>
>     Private Sector:
>
>       * Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>       * Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>       * Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>       * Phil Rushton (BT)
>       * Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>
>     Technical Community:
>
>       * Jari Arkko (IETF)
>       * Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>       * Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>       * Byron Holland (CIRA)
>       * Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>       * Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>
>     Civil Society:
>
>       * Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>       * Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>       * Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>       * Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>       * Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>       * Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>       * Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>       * Adam Peake (Glocom)
>
>
>     Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>
>     Bill
>
>     On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>     <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>>
>>     Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>>
>>     regards
>>
>>     Subi
>>
>>
>>     On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
>>     <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>
>>         Subi,
>>
>>         apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>
>>         /Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland///
>>
>>         /Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing
>>         in European affairs. From 2009, Member of European
>>         Parliament, where he dealt with the implementation of EU
>>         treaties and European Digital Agenda, including e-commerce
>>         and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of
>>         Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts,
>>         issues surrounding //Internet governance and advocacy of the
>>         //multistakeholder/ /approach/ /have been treated with top
>>         priority by the Polish government.  Active participation in
>>         the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF Polska are a
>>         few examples of his recent activities./
>>
>>
>>         It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:
>>         Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>>         <mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>
>>
>>         Best
>>         Igor
>>
>>
>>         On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>         <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>>
>>         wrote:
>>
>>>         Many thanks Igor.
>>>
>>>         Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>
>>>         Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>
>>>         Regards
>>>
>>>         Subi
>>>
>>>
>>>         On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski"
>>>         <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>>         >
>>>         > Dear All,
>>>         >
>>>         > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of
>>>         Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his
>>>         availability as well
>>>         >
>>>         > Best
>>>         > Igor
>>>         >
>>>         >
>>>         > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>         <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>>
>>>         wrote:
>>>         >
>>>         >> Dear All,
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>>         >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed
>>>         their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-;
>>>         Technical Community.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your
>>>         organisation's participating. You've been copied on all
>>>         mails which were sent out previously.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and
>>>         Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs along with
>>>         substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga,
>>>         Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the call today
>>>         but we have a wide pool of options from accross stakeholder
>>>         groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> All of them have been metaculously documented across
>>>         several emails.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format
>>>         and policy questions.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>>         >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we
>>>         keep maximum time for participation and interventions from
>>>         the floor and non facilitators.
>>>         >> 2. Format:
>>>         >> A-no moderator
>>>         >> B-4 moderators
>>>         >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each
>>>         and then abt 40 minute long interventions from different
>>>         stakeholder groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80
>>>         interventions.
>>>         >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic
>>>         with audience interventions only
>>>         >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>>         >> D. An open space
>>>         >>
>>>         >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>>         >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week,
>>>         since inputs have been received on session format the
>>>         moratorium imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be
>>>         lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
>>>         >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self
>>>         nominations. So we have them too.
>>>         >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling
>>>         with youth volunteers. Can they join us too for the session?
>>>         Would they like to nominate some? Participants from the
>>>         Dynamic Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Any other inputs.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free
>>>         and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Regards
>>>         >>
>>>         >> Subi
>>>         >>
>>>         >> _______________________________________________
>>>         >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>>         >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>>>         <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>>>         >>
>>>         http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>>         >
>>>         >
>>>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Igfmaglist mailing list
>     Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>     http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

-- 
Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
mshears at cdt.org
+ 44 771 247 2987

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/16c258b4/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 07:03:14 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 16:33:14 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E4ADA9.3080108@cdt.org>
References: <8gwtpfkqvg1hlxrcnv1l0vs0.1407495049574@email.android.com>
	<53E4ADA9.3080108@cdt.org>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpKe0gyKQCEvo2fyAgSComtDOv+-Sw+YKBGybDEAiMDiuA@mail.gmail.com>

Mathew do you have someone in mind?  specific suggestions would help of
names stakeholder group and contact details. Also there are suggestions
from MAG members Anriette and others that we should have speakers on this
main who have an understanding and are familiar with the history of IGF.

A balance between the two might help.

regards

Subi




On 8 August 2014 16:29, Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org> wrote:

>  On Fiona's second point about familiar names...  Could we please try and
> have some *new voices* in this session?  No disrespect but I see the same
> names from so many related panels in the past - greater diversity would
> help with this session and the IGF's overall credibility.
>
> Matthew
>
>
> On 8/8/2014 11:50 AM, Fiona Alexander wrote:
>
> I will check back with my USG colleagues but what is the difference
> between being on the panel and an intervention?
>
>  As a general matter,  at some point the MAG will need to look across the
> package of main sessions to ensure diversity of speakers.   Seems to be a
> lot of familiar names, multiple times.  Not for now, but perhaps the next
> cycle the MAG should consider developing main session guidelines.
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Subi Chaturvedi
> Date:08/08/2014 6:39 AM (GMT-05:00)
> To: Fiona Alexander
> Cc: evolintgov2014 , MAG-public  , Marilyn Cade
> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
> IG Ecosystem-Update
>
>  Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew from the
> state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making an intervention
> from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn.
>
>  Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the first
> half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA transition. If
> the others are in agreement than your help in approaching him would be very
> welcome.
>
>  Regards
>
>  Subi
>
>
>
>
> On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov> wrote:
>
>> I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a
>> possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted regarding
>> this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government speaker please
>> let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>>
>>
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: William Drake
>> Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
>> To: evolintgov2014
>> Cc: MAG-public
>> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution
>> of IG Ecosystem-Update
>>
>>  Hi
>>
>>  I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this
>> session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all
>> names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The
>> last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been
>> no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which
>> panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a
>> few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their
>> colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people
>> invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old
>> fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated
>> in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and
>> got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s
>> progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid
>> conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
>>
>>
>>  *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session:
>> Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to
>> NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might
>> want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover
>> everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc
>> etc.
>>
>>  *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
>>
>> *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>>
>>
>>  *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>>       [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>>
>> Moderator: TBD
>>
>> Panelists:
>>
>> 1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
>> 2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
>> 3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>>
>> *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>>
>> 1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
>> 2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>>
>>
>>  Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now):
>>
>>    - Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
>>    - Sam Dickinson (TC)
>>
>>
>>  Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members
>> for now):
>>
>>  Government/IGO:
>>
>>    - Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>>    - Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel
>>    1?)
>>    - Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>>
>>
>>    - Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>>    - Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>>    - Larry Strickling (US)
>>    - Ed Vaizy (UK)
>>    - Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>>    - Alice Munyua (AU)
>>
>>  Private Sector:
>>
>>    - Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>>    - Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>>    - Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>>    - Phil Rushton (BT)
>>    - Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>>
>>  Technical Community:
>>
>>    - Jari Arkko (IETF)
>>    - Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>>    - Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>>    - Byron Holland (CIRA)
>>    - Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>>    - Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>>
>>  Civil Society:
>>
>>    - Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>>    - Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>>    - Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>>    - Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>>    - Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>>    - Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>>    - Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>>    - Adam Peake (Glocom)
>>
>>
>>  Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>>
>>  Bill
>>
>>  On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>>
>>  regards
>>
>>  Subi
>>
>>
>> On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>>
>>> Subi,
>>>
>>>  apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>>
>>>  *Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland*
>>>
>>> *Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in
>>> European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt
>>> with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda,
>>> including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of
>>> Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues
>>> surrounding **Internet governance and advocacy of the *
>>> *multistakeholder* *approach* *have been treated with top priority by
>>> the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference
>>> and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.*
>>>
>>>  It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:
>>> Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>>>
>>>  Best
>>> Igor
>>>
>>>
>>>  On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Many thanks Igor.
>>>
>>> Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>
>>> Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Subi
>>>
>>>
>>>  On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Dear All,
>>> >
>>> > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of
>>> Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well
>>> >
>>> > Best
>>> > Igor
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <
>>> subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Dear All,
>>> >>
>>> >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>> >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their
>>> availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>> >>
>>> >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's
>>> participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out
>>> previously.
>>> >>
>>> >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and
>>> Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from
>>> Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will
>>> be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross
>>> stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>> >>
>>> >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>>> >>
>>> >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>> >>
>>> >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy
>>> questions.
>>> >>
>>> >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>> >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum
>>> time for participation and interventions from the floor and non
>>> facilitators.
>>> >> 2. Format:
>>> >> A-no moderator
>>> >> B-4 moderators
>>> >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then
>>> abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each
>>> of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>>> >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience
>>> interventions only
>>> >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>> >> D. An open space
>>> >>
>>> >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>> >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs
>>> have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting
>>> speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their
>>> calenders)
>>> >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self
>>> nominations.  So we have them too.
>>> >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>> >>
>>> >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth
>>> volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to
>>> nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet
>>> values will have some.
>>> >>
>>> >> Any other inputs.
>>> >>
>>> >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact
>>> Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>> >>
>>> >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards
>>> >>
>>> >> Subi
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>> >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>>> >>
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing listEvolintgov2014 at intgovforum.orghttp://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>
> --
> Matthew Shears
> Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
> Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)mshears at cdt.org
> + 44 771 247 2987
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/b80d8666/attachment.htm>

From jeanette at wzb.eu  Fri Aug  8 07:07:15 2014
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 13:07:15 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpKe0gyKQCEvo2fyAgSComtDOv+-Sw+YKBGybDEAiMDiuA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8gwtpfkqvg1hlxrcnv1l0vs0.1407495049574@email.android.com>	<53E4ADA9.3080108@cdt.org>
	<CANRKRpKe0gyKQCEvo2fyAgSComtDOv+-Sw+YKBGybDEAiMDiuA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53E4AF63.1080507@wzb.eu>

Would it be possible for the secretariat to tell us the names of 
confirmed panelists of other main sessions? This would allow us to check 
them against the list of the 28 proposed speakers.

jeanette

Am 08.08.2014 13:03, schrieb Subi Chaturvedi:
> Mathew do you have someone in mind?  specific suggestions would help of
> names stakeholder group and contact details. Also there are suggestions
> from MAG members Anriette and others that we should have speakers on
> this main who have an understanding and are familiar with the history of
> IGF.
>
> A balance between the two might help.
>
> regards
>
> Subi
>
>
>
>
> On 8 August 2014 16:29, Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org
> <mailto:mshears at cdt.org>> wrote:
>
>     On Fiona's second point about familiar names...  Could we please try
>     and have some _new voices_ in this session?  No disrespect but I see
>     the same names from so many related panels in the past - greater
>     diversity would help with this session and the IGF's overall
>     credibility.
>
>     Matthew
>
>
>     On 8/8/2014 11:50 AM, Fiona Alexander wrote:
>>     I will check back with my USG colleagues but what is the
>>     difference between being on the panel and an intervention?
>>
>>     As a general matter,  at some point the MAG will need to look
>>     across the package of main sessions to ensure diversity of
>>     speakers.   Seems to be a lot of familiar names, multiple times.
>>      Not for now, but perhaps the next cycle the MAG should consider
>>     developing main session guidelines.
>>
>>
>>     -------- Original message --------
>>     From: Subi Chaturvedi ____
>>     Date:08/08/2014 6:39 AM (GMT-05:00)
>>     To: Fiona Alexander ____
>>     Cc: evolintgov2014 __, MAG-public __ , Marilyn Cade ________
>>     Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session -
>>     Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
>>
>>     Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew
>>     from the state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making
>>     an intervention from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn.
>>
>>     Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the
>>     first half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA
>>     transition. If the others are in agreement than your help in
>>     approaching him would be very welcome.
>>
>>     Regards
>>
>>     Subi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov
>>     <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
>>
>>         I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed
>>         as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been
>>         contacted regarding this request.  If there is a desire to
>>         have a US Government speaker please let me know ASAP and we
>>         can find one.
>>
>>
>>         -------- Original message --------
>>         From: William Drake
>>         Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
>>         To: evolintgov2014
>>         Cc: MAG-public
>>         Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session -
>>         Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
>>
>>         Hi
>>
>>         I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with
>>         this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times
>>         the list of all names people had suggested as possible
>>         speakers on the two panels.  The last version was sent to the
>>         mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been no collective
>>         discussion about options and who might be optimal on which
>>         panel. There have been a references to bilateral private
>>         conversations, a few requests by MAG members for speaking
>>         slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit
>>         awkward), and a few confirmations that people invited
>>         previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being
>>         old fashioned but all previous main session planning groups
>>         I?ve participated in over the years worked in a more
>>         transparent and participatory way and got to consensus more
>>         quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s
>>         progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a
>>         solid conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
>>
>>
>>         *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session:
>>         Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF -
>>         Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a
>>         bit awkward, we might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re
>>         going to expanding it to cover everything happening in the
>>         wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc etc.
>>
>>         *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
>>
>>         *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>>
>>
>>         *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>>             [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>>
>>         Moderator: TBD
>>
>>         Panelists:
>>
>>         1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
>>         2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
>>         3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>>
>>         *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>>
>>         1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
>>         2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>>
>>
>>         Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members
>>         for now):
>>
>>           * Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
>>           * Sam Dickinson (TC)
>>
>>
>>         Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG
>>         members for now):
>>
>>         Government/IGO:
>>
>>           * Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>>           * Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to
>>             Igor?for panel 1?)
>>           * Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>>
>>           * Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>>           * Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>>           * Larry Strickling (US)
>>           * Ed Vaizy (UK)
>>           * Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>>           * Alice Munyua (AU)
>>
>>         Private Sector:
>>
>>           * Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>>           * Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>>           * Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>>           * Phil Rushton (BT)
>>           * Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>>
>>         Technical Community:
>>
>>           * Jari Arkko (IETF)
>>           * Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>>           * Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>>           * Byron Holland (CIRA)
>>           * Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>>           * Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>>
>>         Civil Society:
>>
>>           * Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>>           * Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>>           * Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>>           * Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>>           * Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>>           * Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>>           * Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>>           * Adam Peake (Glocom)
>>
>>
>>         Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>>
>>         Bill
>>
>>         On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>         <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>>
>>         wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>         Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>>>
>>>         regards
>>>
>>>         Subi
>>>
>>>
>>>         On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
>>>         <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>>
>>>             Subi,
>>>
>>>             apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>>
>>>             /Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland///
>>>
>>>             /Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer
>>>             specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member of
>>>             European Parliament, where he dealt with the
>>>             implementation of EU treaties and European Digital
>>>             Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since
>>>             November 2013, Minister of Administration and
>>>             Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues
>>>             surrounding //Internet governance and advocacy of the
>>>             //multistakeholder/ /approach/ /have been treated with
>>>             top priority by the Polish government.  Active
>>>             participation in the NetMundial conference and creation
>>>             of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities./
>>>
>>>
>>>             It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:
>>>             Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>>>             <mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>
>>>
>>>             Best
>>>             Igor
>>>
>>>
>>>             On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>             <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>>>             <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>             Many thanks Igor.
>>>>
>>>>             Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>>
>>>>             Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>>
>>>>             Regards
>>>>
>>>>             Subi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>             On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski"
>>>>             <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>>
>>>>             wrote:
>>>>             >
>>>>             > Dear All,
>>>>             >
>>>>             > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister
>>>>             of Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his
>>>>             availability as well
>>>>             >
>>>>             > Best
>>>>             > Igor
>>>>             >
>>>>             >
>>>>             > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>>             <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>>>>             <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>             >
>>>>             >> Dear All,
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder
>>>>             group-Gov.
>>>>             >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have
>>>>             confirmed their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy
>>>>             Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your
>>>>             organisation's participating. You've been copied on all
>>>>             mails which were sent out previously.
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and
>>>>             Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs along with
>>>>             substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul,
>>>>             Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the
>>>>             call today but we have a wide pool of options from
>>>>             accross stakeholder groups and some names for moderators
>>>>             to choose from.
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> All of them have been metaculously documented across
>>>>             several emails.
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> Today there will be discussion further on refining
>>>>             format and policy questions.
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>>>             >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we
>>>>             keep maximum time for participation and interventions
>>>>             from the floor and non facilitators.
>>>>             >> 2. Format:
>>>>             >> A-no moderator
>>>>             >> B-4 moderators
>>>>             >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins
>>>>             each and then abt 40 minute long interventions from
>>>>             different stakeholder groups for each of the two
>>>>             halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>>>>             >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open
>>>>             mic with audience interventions only
>>>>             >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>>>             >> D. An open space
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>>>             >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week,
>>>>             since inputs have been received on session format the
>>>>             moratorium imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be
>>>>             lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
>>>>             >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are
>>>>             self nominations. So we have them too.
>>>>             >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are
>>>>             travelling with youth volunteers. Can they join us too
>>>>             for the session? Would they like to nominate some?
>>>>             Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet
>>>>             values will have some.
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> Any other inputs.
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel
>>>>             free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> Regards
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> Subi
>>>>             >>
>>>>             >> _______________________________________________
>>>>             >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>>>             >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>>>>             <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>>>>             >>
>>>>             http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>>>             >
>>>>             >
>>>>
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Igfmaglist mailing list
>>         Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>>         http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>     Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org  <mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>
>>     http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>     --
>     Matthew Shears
>     Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
>     Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
>     mshears at cdt.org  <mailto:mshears at cdt.org>
>     + 44 771 247 2987
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>



From FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov  Fri Aug  8 07:07:44 2014
From: FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov (Fiona Alexander)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 07:07:44 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
Message-ID: <2pc3skqb26pyhtedhrqrmv1c.1407495773549@email.android.com>

My recollection is that we have a MAG call next Wed.  To adequately prepare for that can all the main session papers, each clearly indicating the format, panelists,  moderators and planned interventions from the floor, be circulated in one email from the Secretariat by COB Monday.



-------- Original message --------
From: Matthew Shears
Date:08/08/2014 7:00 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: Fiona Alexander , Subi Chaturvedi
Cc: MAG-public , evolintgov2014
Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

On Fiona's second point about familiar names...  Could we please try and have some new voices in this session?  No disrespect but I see the same names from so many related panels in the past - greater diversity would help with this session and the IGF's overall credibility.

Matthew

On 8/8/2014 11:50 AM, Fiona Alexander wrote:
I will check back with my USG colleagues but what is the difference between being on the panel and an intervention?

As a general matter,  at some point the MAG will need to look across the package of main sessions to ensure diversity of speakers.   Seems to be a lot of familiar names, multiple times.  Not for now, but perhaps the next cycle the MAG should consider developing main session guidelines.


-------- Original message --------
From: Subi Chaturvedi
Date:08/08/2014 6:39 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: Fiona Alexander
Cc: evolintgov2014 , MAG-public , Marilyn Cade
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew from the state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making an intervention from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn.

Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the first half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA transition. If the others are in agreement than your help in approaching him would be very welcome.

Regards

Subi




On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov<mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.


-------- Original message --------
From: William Drake
Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: evolintgov2014
Cc: MAG-public
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

Hi

I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...


Session title: As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc etc.

Descriptive text: what?s in the program paper seems dated.

Speakers/Moderators: [is the below still current?]


Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem*
      [including per Janis the NM Initiative]

Moderator: TBD

Panelists:

1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]

Panel 2: The Role of the IGF

1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]


Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now):

 *   Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
 *   Sam Dickinson (TC)

Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members for now):

Government/IGO:

 *   Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
 *   Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel 1?)
 *   Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)

 *   Norberto Berner (Argentina)
 *   Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
 *   Larry Strickling (US)
 *   Ed Vaizy (UK)
 *   Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
 *   Alice Munyua (AU)

Private Sector:

 *   Danil Kerimi (WEF)
 *   Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
 *   Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
 *   Phil Rushton (BT)
 *   Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)

Technical Community:

 *   Jari Arkko (IETF)
 *   Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
 *   Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
 *   Byron Holland (CIRA)
 *   Geoff Huston (APNIC)
 *   Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)

Civil Society:

 *   Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
 *   Stephanie Perrin (UT)
 *   Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
 *   Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
 *   Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
 *   Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
 *   Marilia Maciel (FGV)
 *   Adam Peake (Glocom)

Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?

Bill

On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:


Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.

regards

Subi


On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
Subi,

apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:

Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland
Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding Internet governance and advocacy of the multistakeholder approach have been treated with top priority by the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.

It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:  Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl<mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>

Best
Igor


On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:


Many thanks Igor.

Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.

Collecting it for all the speakers.

Regards

Subi



On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well
>
> Best
> Igor
>
>
> On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>
>> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out previously.
>>
>> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>
>> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>>
>> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>
>> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy questions.
>>
>> Suggestions pertaining to :
>> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum time for participation and interventions from the floor and non facilitators.
>> 2. Format:
>> A-no moderator
>> B-4 moderators
>> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience interventions only
>> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>> D. An open space
>>
>> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
>> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self nominations.  So we have them too.
>> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>
>> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>>
>> Any other inputs.
>>
>> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>
>> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Subi
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>


_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org





_______________________________________________
Evolintgov2014 mailing list
Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org<mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org



--
Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
mshears at cdt.org<mailto:mshears at cdt.org>
+ 44 771 247 2987
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/b2a2df65/attachment.htm>

From wjdrake at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 07:19:34 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 13:19:34 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpLK8g-xYGNCBPY2xMh+XRyw4SJFgaNT_9D1sDYZ_e4ibw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <kw287iq61mx23hnh0fwyta19.1407408884092@email.android.com>
	<CANRKRpLK8g-xYGNCBPY2xMh+XRyw4SJFgaNT_9D1sDYZ_e4ibw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F2090680-5F38-499C-B199-402014C7699A@gmail.com>

Hi again Subi

To facilitate the discussion, could you perhaps send to <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org> the list of people you and Marilyn have confirmed for the two panels to date, along with the list of names still under discussion (i.e. an update/correction of what I sent yesterday, below)?  I don?t recall the discussion of Danny Sepulveda, which is why Fiona and I were talking about Larry Strickling.  Obviously we can?t put two senior US government people in the same session.  Someone also just told me in a side conversation that Rob Deibert had been invited.  I didn?t know that either.  So please, if we could just synch files and keep a running up to date tab of who?s confirmed and who?s in play for the group to consider, that?d be really helpful.

I also agree with the suggestion that the MAG should perhaps set down a fixed procedure for how main sessions are to be managed.  Let?s avoid any future unnecessary bits of confusion or disagreement about how we proceed with these.  If defined procedures are needed for workshop evaluation and selection, surely they?d be advisable for main sessions as well.

Thanks much,

Bill

PS: While the procedural discussion is of relevance to all MAG members, when we get to going back and forth on speakers we should probably spare everyone and keep it on <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>

 

On Aug 8, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:

> Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew from the state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making an intervention from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn.
> 
> Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the first half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA transition. If the others are in agreement than your help in approaching him would be very welcome. 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Subi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov> wrote:
> I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.
> 
> 
> -------- Original message --------
> From: William Drake
> Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
> To: evolintgov2014
> Cc: MAG-public
> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
> 
> Hi
> 
> I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
> 
> 
> Session title: As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc etc.
> 
> Descriptive text: what?s in the program paper seems dated.
> 
> Speakers/Moderators: [is the below still current?]
> 
> 
> Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem*
>       [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
> 
> Moderator: TBD  
> 
> Panelists:
> 
> 1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
> 2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
> 3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
> 
> Panel 2: The Role of the IGF
>  
> 1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
> 2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
> 
> 
> Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now): 
> Jeanette Hofmann (CS) 
> Sam Dickinson (TC)
> 
> Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members for now): 
> 
> Government/IGO:
> Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
> Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel 1?)
> Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
> Norberto Berner (Argentina)
> Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
> Larry Strickling (US)
> Ed Vaizy (UK)
> Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
> Alice Munyua (AU)
> Private Sector:
> Danil Kerimi (WEF)
> Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
> Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
> Phil Rushton (BT)
> Jimson Olufuye (WITSA) 
> Technical Community:
> Jari Arkko (IETF)
> Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
> Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
> Byron Holland (CIRA)
> Geoff Huston (APNIC)
> Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
> Civil Society:
> Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
> Stephanie Perrin (UT)
> Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
> Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
> Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
> Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
> Marilia Maciel (FGV)
> Adam Peake (Glocom)
> 
> Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
> 
> Bill
> 
> On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>> 
>> regards
>> 
>> Subi
>> 
>> 
>> On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>> Subi,
>> 
>> apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>> 
>> Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland
>> 
>> Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding Internet governance and advocacy of the multistakeholder approach have been treated with top priority by the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.
>> 
>> 
>> It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:  Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>> 
>> Best
>> Igor
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Many thanks Igor.
>>> 
>>> Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>> 
>>> Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> 
>>> Subi
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Dear All,
>>> >
>>> > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well 
>>> >
>>> > Best
>>> > Igor
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Dear All,
>>> >>
>>> >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>> >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>> >>
>>> >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out previously.
>>> >>
>>> >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>> >>
>>> >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>>> >>
>>> >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>> >>
>>> >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy questions.
>>> >>
>>> >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>> >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum time for participation and interventions from the floor and non facilitators. 
>>> >> 2. Format:
>>> >> A-no moderator
>>> >> B-4 moderators
>>> >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>>> >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience interventions only
>>> >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>> >> D. An open space
>>> >>
>>> >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>> >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
>>> >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self nominations.  So we have them too.
>>> >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>> >>
>>> >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>>> >>
>>> >> Any other inputs.
>>> >>
>>> >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>> >>
>>> >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards
>>> >>
>>> >> Subi
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>> >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>>> >> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>> >
>>> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/a50f2ebe/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 07:24:09 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 16:54:09 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <F2090680-5F38-499C-B199-402014C7699A@gmail.com>
References: <kw287iq61mx23hnh0fwyta19.1407408884092@email.android.com>
	<CANRKRpLK8g-xYGNCBPY2xMh+XRyw4SJFgaNT_9D1sDYZ_e4ibw@mail.gmail.com>
	<F2090680-5F38-499C-B199-402014C7699A@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpLhGaav85Si5bjU3vqkpH-xR8DX7d+weOd1Qy-W7H7yug@mail.gmail.com>

Certainly Bill. As you would recall that's precisely what I have suggested.
We plan to do that by C.O.B. today.

And as far as I am aware Ron hasn't been invited, though he has been on the
original list from day 1. I do not have his contact details.

As far as Amb. Sepulveda is concerned , he was proposed by Marilyn after I
believe a discussion with USG, she will be able to fill us in with more
details. I did point out that he is on the access panel.

I have repeatedly asked for contact details of speakers proposed.  And that
helps.

The MAG list is still useful for this discussion for procedural inputs and
institutional memory . Also many times people not subscribed to the list
have made excellent contributions, so it's best to keep every one in the
loop.

warmest

Subi



On 8 August 2014 16:49, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi again Subi
>
> To facilitate the discussion, could you perhaps send to <
> evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org> the list of people you and Marilyn have
> confirmed for the two panels to date, along with the list of names still
> under discussion (i.e. an update/correction of what I sent yesterday,
> below)?  I don?t recall the discussion of Danny Sepulveda, which is why
> Fiona and I were talking about Larry Strickling.  Obviously we can?t put
> two senior US government people in the same session.  Someone also just
> told me in a side conversation that Rob Deibert had been invited.  I didn?t
> know that either.  So please, if we could just synch files and keep a
> running up to date tab of who?s confirmed and who?s in play for the group
> to consider, that?d be really helpful.
>
> I also agree with the suggestion that the MAG should perhaps set down a
> fixed procedure for how main sessions are to be managed.  Let?s avoid any
> future unnecessary bits of confusion or disagreement about how we proceed
> with these.  If defined procedures are needed for workshop evaluation and
> selection, surely they?d be advisable for main sessions as well.
>
> Thanks much,
>
> Bill
>
> PS: While the procedural discussion is of relevance to all MAG members,
> when we get to going back and forth on speakers we should probably spare
> everyone and keep it on <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>
>
>
>
> On Aug 8, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew from the
> state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making an intervention
> from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn.
>
> Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the first
> half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA transition. If
> the others are in agreement than your help in approaching him would be very
> welcome.
>
> Regards
>
> Subi
>
>
>
>
> On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov> wrote:
>
>>  I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a
>> possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted regarding
>> this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government speaker please
>> let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>>
>>
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: William Drake
>> Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
>> To: evolintgov2014
>> Cc: MAG-public
>> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution
>> of IG Ecosystem-Update
>>
>>  Hi
>>
>>  I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this
>> session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all
>> names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The
>> last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been
>> no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which
>> panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a
>> few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their
>> colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people
>> invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old
>> fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated
>> in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and
>> got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s
>> progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid
>> conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
>>
>>
>>  *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session:
>> Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to
>> NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might
>> want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover
>> everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc
>> etc.
>>
>>  *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
>>
>> *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>>
>>
>>  *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>>       [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>>
>> Moderator: TBD
>>
>> Panelists:
>>
>> 1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
>> 2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
>> 3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>>
>> *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>>
>> 1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
>> 2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>>
>>
>>  Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now):
>>
>>    - Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
>>    - Sam Dickinson (TC)
>>
>>
>>  Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members
>> for now):
>>
>>  Government/IGO:
>>
>>    - Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>>    - Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel
>>    1?)
>>    - Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>>
>>
>>    - Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>>    - Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>>    - Larry Strickling (US)
>>    - Ed Vaizy (UK)
>>    - Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>>    - Alice Munyua (AU)
>>
>>  Private Sector:
>>
>>    - Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>>    - Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>>    - Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>>    - Phil Rushton (BT)
>>    - Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>>
>>  Technical Community:
>>
>>    - Jari Arkko (IETF)
>>    - Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>>    - Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>>    - Byron Holland (CIRA)
>>    - Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>>    - Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>>
>>  Civil Society:
>>
>>    - Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>>    - Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>>    - Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>>    - Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>>    - Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>>    - Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>>    - Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>>    - Adam Peake (Glocom)
>>
>>
>>  Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>>
>>  Bill
>>
>>  On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>>
>>  regards
>>
>>  Subi
>>
>>
>> On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>>
>>> Subi,
>>>
>>>  apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>>
>>>  *Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland*
>>>
>>> *Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in
>>> European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt
>>> with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda,
>>> including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of
>>> Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues
>>> surrounding **Internet governance and advocacy of the *
>>> *multistakeholder* *approach* *have been treated with top priority by
>>> the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference
>>> and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.*
>>>
>>>  It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:
>>> Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>>>
>>>  Best
>>> Igor
>>>
>>>
>>>  On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Many thanks Igor.
>>>
>>> Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>
>>> Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Subi
>>>
>>>
>>> On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Dear All,
>>> >
>>> > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of
>>> Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well
>>> >
>>> > Best
>>> > Igor
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <
>>> subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Dear All,
>>> >>
>>> >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>> >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their
>>> availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>> >>
>>> >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's
>>> participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out
>>> previously.
>>> >>
>>> >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and
>>> Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from
>>> Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will
>>> be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross
>>> stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>> >>
>>> >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>>> >>
>>> >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>> >>
>>> >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy
>>> questions.
>>> >>
>>> >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>> >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum
>>> time for participation and interventions from the floor and non
>>> facilitators.
>>> >> 2. Format:
>>> >> A-no moderator
>>> >> B-4 moderators
>>> >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then
>>> abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each
>>> of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>>> >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience
>>> interventions only
>>> >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>> >> D. An open space
>>> >>
>>> >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>> >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs
>>> have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting
>>> speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their
>>> calenders)
>>> >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self
>>> nominations.  So we have them too.
>>> >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>> >>
>>> >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth
>>> volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to
>>> nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet
>>> values will have some.
>>> >>
>>> >> Any other inputs.
>>> >>
>>> >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact
>>> Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>> >>
>>> >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards
>>> >>
>>> >> Subi
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>> >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>>> >>
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/f403a29f/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 07:32:30 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 17:02:30 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Query: [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution
 of IG Ecosystem-Update
Message-ID: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>

SERVING MAG MEMBERS as panelists on Main sessions-

Can we get clarity on this?

What is it that, we're following now?

Is there a blanket ban on any serving MAG member being a panelist on the
MAIN sessions or are we making exceptions  where relevant?

What is the sense of the group on this?

warmest

Subi
----




On 8 August 2014 16:54, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:

> Certainly Bill. As you would recall that's precisely what I have
> suggested. We plan to do that by C.O.B. today.
>
> And as far as I am aware Ron hasn't been invited, though he has been on
> the original list from day 1. I do not have his contact details.
>
> As far as Amb. Sepulveda is concerned , he was proposed by Marilyn after I
> believe a discussion with USG, she will be able to fill us in with more
> details. I did point out that he is on the access panel.
>
> I have repeatedly asked for contact details of speakers proposed.  And
> that helps.
>
> The MAG list is still useful for this discussion for procedural inputs and
> institutional memory . Also many times people not subscribed to the list
> have made excellent contributions, so it's best to keep every one in the
> loop.
>
> warmest
>
> Subi
>
>
>
> On 8 August 2014 16:49, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi again Subi
>>
>> To facilitate the discussion, could you perhaps send to <
>> evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org> the list of people you and Marilyn have
>> confirmed for the two panels to date, along with the list of names still
>> under discussion (i.e. an update/correction of what I sent yesterday,
>> below)?  I don?t recall the discussion of Danny Sepulveda, which is why
>> Fiona and I were talking about Larry Strickling.  Obviously we can?t put
>> two senior US government people in the same session.  Someone also just
>> told me in a side conversation that Rob Deibert had been invited.  I didn?t
>> know that either.  So please, if we could just synch files and keep a
>> running up to date tab of who?s confirmed and who?s in play for the group
>> to consider, that?d be really helpful.
>>
>> I also agree with the suggestion that the MAG should perhaps set down a
>> fixed procedure for how main sessions are to be managed.  Let?s avoid any
>> future unnecessary bits of confusion or disagreement about how we proceed
>> with these.  If defined procedures are needed for workshop evaluation and
>> selection, surely they?d be advisable for main sessions as well.
>>
>> Thanks much,
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> PS: While the procedural discussion is of relevance to all MAG members,
>> when we get to going back and forth on speakers we should probably spare
>> everyone and keep it on <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 8, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew from the
>> state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making an intervention
>> from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn.
>>
>> Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the first
>> half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA transition. If
>> the others are in agreement than your help in approaching him would be very
>> welcome.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Subi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov> wrote:
>>
>>>  I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a
>>> possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted regarding
>>> this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government speaker please
>>> let me know ASAP and we can find one.
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Original message --------
>>> From: William Drake
>>> Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
>>> To: evolintgov2014
>>> Cc: MAG-public
>>> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution
>>> of IG Ecosystem-Update
>>>
>>>  Hi
>>>
>>>  I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this
>>> session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all
>>> names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The
>>> last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been
>>> no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which
>>> panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a
>>> few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their
>>> colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people
>>> invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old
>>> fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated
>>> in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and
>>> got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s
>>> progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid
>>> conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
>>>
>>>
>>>  *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session:
>>> Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to
>>> NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might
>>> want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover
>>> everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc
>>> etc.
>>>
>>>  *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
>>>
>>> *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>>>
>>>
>>>  *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>>>       [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>>>
>>> Moderator: TBD
>>>
>>> Panelists:
>>>
>>> 1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
>>> 2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
>>> 3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>>>
>>> *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>>>
>>> 1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
>>> 2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>>>
>>>
>>>  Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now):
>>>
>>>    - Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
>>>    - Sam Dickinson (TC)
>>>
>>>
>>>  Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members
>>> for now):
>>>
>>>  Government/IGO:
>>>
>>>    - Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>>>    - Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for
>>>    panel 1?)
>>>    - Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>>>
>>>
>>>    - Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>>>    - Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>>>    - Larry Strickling (US)
>>>    - Ed Vaizy (UK)
>>>    - Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>>>    - Alice Munyua (AU)
>>>
>>>  Private Sector:
>>>
>>>    - Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>>>    - Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>>>    - Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>>>    - Phil Rushton (BT)
>>>    - Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>>>
>>>  Technical Community:
>>>
>>>    - Jari Arkko (IETF)
>>>    - Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>>>    - Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>>>    - Byron Holland (CIRA)
>>>    - Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>>>    - Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>>>
>>>  Civil Society:
>>>
>>>    - Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>>>    - Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>>>    - Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>>>    - Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>>>    - Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>>>    - Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>>>    - Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>>>    - Adam Peake (Glocom)
>>>
>>>
>>>  Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>>>
>>>  Bill
>>>
>>>  On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>>>
>>>  regards
>>>
>>>  Subi
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Subi,
>>>>
>>>>  apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>>>
>>>>  *Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland*
>>>>
>>>> *Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in
>>>> European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt
>>>> with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda,
>>>> including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of
>>>> Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues
>>>> surrounding **Internet governance and advocacy of the *
>>>> *multistakeholder* *approach* *have been treated with top priority by
>>>> the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference
>>>> and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.*
>>>>
>>>>  It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:
>>>> Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>>>>
>>>>  Best
>>>> Igor
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Many thanks Igor.
>>>>
>>>> Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>>
>>>> Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Subi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Dear All,
>>>> >
>>>> > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of
>>>> Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well
>>>> >
>>>> > Best
>>>> > Igor
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <
>>>> subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Dear All,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>>> >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their
>>>> availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's
>>>> participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out
>>>> previously.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and
>>>> Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from
>>>> Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will
>>>> be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross
>>>> stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy
>>>> questions.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>>> >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum
>>>> time for participation and interventions from the floor and non
>>>> facilitators.
>>>> >> 2. Format:
>>>> >> A-no moderator
>>>> >> B-4 moderators
>>>> >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then
>>>> abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each
>>>> of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>>>> >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience
>>>> interventions only
>>>> >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>>> >> D. An open space
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>>> >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs
>>>> have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting
>>>> speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their
>>>> calenders)
>>>> >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self
>>>> nominations.  So we have them too.
>>>> >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth
>>>> volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to
>>>> nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet
>>>> values will have some.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Any other inputs.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and
>>>> contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Regards
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Subi
>>>> >>
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>>> >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>>>> >>
>>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/237c8a95/attachment.htm>

From jeanette at wzb.eu  Fri Aug  8 07:40:07 2014
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 13:40:07 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Query: [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session -
 Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>



Am 08.08.2014 13:32, schrieb Subi Chaturvedi:
> SERVING MAG MEMBERS as panelists on Main sessions-
>
> Can we get clarity on this?

During the first years, when I was on the MAG it was considered 
inappropriate for MAG members to be on the panel of main sessions. Some 
of us served as moderators though. With the turnover of the MAG, this 
sense of inappropriateness vanished and for the following one or two 
years there were many MAG members on main sessions. I think the ban was 
then renewed.

Generally I think it is difficult to invite individual MAG members to 
main sessions but tell others that they should not do this.

jeanette

>
> What is it that, we're following now?
>
> Is there a blanket ban on any serving MAG member being a panelist on the
> MAIN sessions or are we making exceptions  where relevant?
>
> What is the sense of the group on this?
>
> warmest
>
> Subi
> ----
>
>
>
>
> On 8 August 2014 16:54, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
> <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Certainly Bill. As you would recall that's precisely what I have
>     suggested. We plan to do that by C.O.B. today.
>
>     And as far as I am aware Ron hasn't been invited, though he has been
>     on the original list from day 1. I do not have his contact details.
>
>     As far as Amb. Sepulveda is concerned , he was proposed by Marilyn
>     after I believe a discussion with USG, she will be able to fill us
>     in with more details. I did point out that he is on the access panel.
>
>     I have repeatedly asked for contact details of speakers proposed.
>       And that helps.
>
>     The MAG list is still useful for this discussion for procedural
>     inputs and institutional memory . Also many times people not
>     subscribed to the list have made excellent contributions, so it's
>     best to keep every one in the loop.
>
>     warmest
>
>     Subi
>
>
>
>     On 8 August 2014 16:49, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com
>     <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         Hi again Subi
>
>         To facilitate the discussion, could you perhaps send to
>         <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>         <mailto:evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>> the list of people you
>         and Marilyn have confirmed for the two panels to date, along
>         with the list of names still under discussion (i.e. an
>         update/correction of what I sent yesterday, below)?  I don?t
>         recall the discussion of Danny Sepulveda, which is why Fiona and
>         I were talking about Larry Strickling.  Obviously we can?t put
>         two senior US government people in the same session.  Someone
>         also just told me in a side conversation that Rob Deibert had
>         been invited.  I didn?t know that either.  So please, if we
>         could just synch files and keep a running up to date tab of
>         who?s confirmed and who?s in play for the group to consider,
>         that?d be really helpful.
>
>         I also agree with the suggestion that the MAG should perhaps set
>         down a fixed procedure for how main sessions are to be managed.
>           Let?s avoid any future unnecessary bits of confusion or
>         disagreement about how we proceed with these.  If defined
>         procedures are needed for workshop evaluation and selection,
>         surely they?d be advisable for main sessions as well.
>
>         Thanks much,
>
>         Bill
>
>         PS: While the procedural discussion is of relevance to all MAG
>         members, when we get to going back and forth on speakers we
>         should probably spare everyone and keep it
>         on <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>         <mailto:evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>>
>
>
>         On Aug 8, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
>         <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>>         Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with
>>         Andrew from the state department that Ambassador Sepulveda
>>         will be making an intervention from USG. He's been
>>         coordinating this with Marilyn.
>>
>>         Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in
>>         the first half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on
>>         the IANA transition. If the others are in agreement than your
>>         help in approaching him would be very welcome.
>>
>>         Regards
>>
>>         Subi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>         On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander
>>         <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
>>
>>             I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is
>>             listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has
>>             not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a
>>             desire to have a US Government speaker please let me know
>>             ASAP and we can find one.
>>
>>
>>             -------- Original message --------
>>             From: William Drake __
>>             Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
>>             To: evolintgov2014 __
>>             Cc: MAG-public __
>>             Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main
>>             Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
>>
>>             Hi
>>
>>             I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding
>>             with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a
>>             few times the list of all names people had suggested as
>>             possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was
>>             sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been
>>             no collective discussion about options and who might be
>>             optimal on which panel. There have been a references to
>>             bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG
>>             members for speaking slots for themselves or their
>>             colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few
>>             confirmations that people invited previously have agreed
>>             to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all
>>             previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in
>>             over the years worked in a more transparent and
>>             participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I
>>             just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It
>>             would be good if we could move this forward to a solid
>>             conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
>>
>>
>>             *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus
>>             Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role
>>             of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU,
>>             other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the
>>             subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover
>>             everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM
>>             Initiative, etc etc.
>>
>>             *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
>>
>>             *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>>
>>
>>             *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>>                   [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>>
>>             Moderator: TBD
>>
>>             Panelists:
>>
>>             1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
>>             2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
>>             3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>>
>>             *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>>
>>             1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
>>             2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>>
>>
>>             Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG
>>             members for now):
>>
>>               * Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
>>               * Sam Dickinson (TC)
>>
>>
>>             Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off
>>             MAG members for now):
>>
>>             Government/IGO:
>>
>>               * Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>>               * Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to
>>                 Igor?for panel 1?)
>>               * Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>>
>>               * Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>>               * Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>>               * Larry Strickling (US)
>>               * Ed Vaizy (UK)
>>               * Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>>               * Alice Munyua (AU)
>>
>>             Private Sector:
>>
>>               * Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>>               * Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>>               * Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>>               * Phil Rushton (BT)
>>               * Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>>
>>             Technical Community:
>>
>>               * Jari Arkko (IETF)
>>               * Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>>               * Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>>               * Byron Holland (CIRA)
>>               * Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>>               * Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>>
>>             Civil Society:
>>
>>               * Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>>               * Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>>               * Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>>               * Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>>               * Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>>               * Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>>               * Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>>               * Adam Peake (Glocom)
>>
>>
>>             Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>>
>>             Bill
>>
>>             On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>             <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>>             <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>             Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>>>
>>>             regards
>>>
>>>             Subi
>>>
>>>
>>>             On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski
>>>             <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>>
>>>                 Subi,
>>>
>>>                 apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>>
>>>                 /Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland///
>>>
>>>                 /Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer
>>>                 specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member
>>>                 of European Parliament, where he dealt with the
>>>                 implementation of EU treaties and European Digital
>>>                 Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues.
>>>                 Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and
>>>                 Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues
>>>                 surrounding //Internet governance and advocacy of the
>>>                 //multistakeholder/ /approach/ /have been treated
>>>                 with top priority by the Polish government.  Active
>>>                 participation in the NetMundial conference and
>>>                 creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his
>>>                 recent activities./
>>>
>>>
>>>                 It's best to contact him thru the Head of his
>>>                 Cabinet: Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>>>                 <mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>
>>>
>>>                 Best
>>>                 Igor
>>>
>>>
>>>                 On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>                 <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>>>                 <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>                 Many thanks Igor.
>>>>
>>>>                 Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>>
>>>>                 Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>>
>>>>                 Regards
>>>>
>>>>                 Subi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                 On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski"
>>>>                 <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
>>>>                 <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>>>                 >
>>>>                 > Dear All,
>>>>                 >
>>>>                 > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL
>>>>                 Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs
>>>>                 confirmed his availability as well
>>>>                 >
>>>>                 > Best
>>>>                 > Igor
>>>>                 >
>>>>                 >
>>>>                 > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>>                 <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>>>>                 <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>                 >
>>>>                 >> Dear All,
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU)
>>>>                 -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>>>                 >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have
>>>>                 confirmed their availability in addition to Ms.
>>>>                 Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your
>>>>                 organisation's participating. You've been copied on
>>>>                 all mails which were sent out previously.
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads
>>>>                 and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs
>>>>                 along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada,
>>>>                 Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus
>>>>                 will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of
>>>>                 options from accross stakeholder groups and some
>>>>                 names for moderators to choose from.
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> All of them have been metaculously documented
>>>>                 across several emails.
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> Today there will be discussion further on
>>>>                 refining format and policy questions.
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>>>                 >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so
>>>>                 that we keep maximum time for participation and
>>>>                 interventions from the floor and non facilitators.
>>>>                 >> 2. Format:
>>>>                 >> A-no moderator
>>>>                 >> B-4 moderators
>>>>                 >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3
>>>>                 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions
>>>>                 from different stakeholder groups for each of the
>>>>                 two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>>>>                 >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then
>>>>                 open mic with audience interventions only
>>>>                 >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>>>                 >> D. An open space
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>>>                 >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this
>>>>                 week, since inputs have been received on session
>>>>                 format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers
>>>>                 can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice
>>>>                 to block their calenders)
>>>>                 >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some
>>>>                 are self nominations.  So we have them too.
>>>>                 >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are
>>>>                 travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us
>>>>                 too for the session? Would they like to nominate
>>>>                 some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on
>>>>                 core Internet values will have some.
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> Any other inputs.
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please
>>>>                 feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> Regards
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> Subi
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 >> _______________________________________________
>>>>                 >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>>>                 >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>>>>                 <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>>>>                 >>
>>>>                 http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>>>                 >
>>>>                 >
>>>>
>>
>>
>>             _______________________________________________
>>             Igfmaglist mailing list
>>             Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>>             http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>         Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>         <mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>
>>         http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>



From virat.bhatia at intl.att.com  Fri Aug  8 07:43:54 2014
From: virat.bhatia at intl.att.com (Bhatia, Virat)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 17:13:54 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
 IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <8gwtpfkqvg1hlxrcnv1l0vs0.1407495049574@email.android.com>
References: <8gwtpfkqvg1hlxrcnv1l0vs0.1407495049574@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440EF1@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>

Dear MAG Members,
With regards to duplication of names, this is essentially occurring for 2 reasons:

(i)      First when organizers inadvertently invite the same people on their session without knowing that the same person may have been invited elsewhere. (No one?s fault.)

(ii)    When those who refer / volunteer names send the same name to multiple organizers. We had one such situation with another main session but that has now been resolved amicably.
For ease of reference, I am including the list of speakers for the main session on ?Policies Enabling Access, Growth and Development? to be held on Day 2 morning.  Hopefully this will help avoid duplications for other session to the extent possible.  There may be a couple of additions from the civil society side but we are trying to get a new voice, possibly from Ecuador, or Kenya or Brazil.
The question is, whether there can be a ?hard and fast? regarding ?one main session only? for speakers, beyond the self-imposed limit for MAG members on themselves?   If yes, we need a process for better information sharing, since organizers can easily be blindsided by 5 lists running simultaneously and several cross emails. Something to think about for 2015 process improvements.
To bring a swift closure to the remaining main sessions ? ( 3 week left), one request for those who are now contributing names to the list. When sending references, please send details about stakeholder group, country / regions of residence / work and email ID.  Further, if at all possible, please pre-check their availability before sending their reference.  This would be tremendously helpful in locking down speakers, especially new voices.
 At times organizers spend days getting hold of contacts / email IDs (due to time difference), and then many days awaiting a response from proposed speakers, who have no idea that their names have been volunteered by someone else.
So in summary:

(i)      Please fell feel to refer to the Access / Development speaker list provided below (to avoid duplication);  and,

(ii)    Please send in full details of all speakers, preferably after checking their availability and interest (given the acute shortage of time in the run-up to IGF).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i)          International Organizations

?        Mr. Getachew Engida,  Deputy Director General, UNESCO

?        Mr. Tomas Lamanauskas, Head,  Corporate Strategy Division, ITU
(ii)          Government:

?        Dr. Hoda Baraka,  Advisor to the Minister of ICT,  Govt. of Qatar

?        Dr. Norberto Berner, Secretary of Communications, Govt.  of Argentina

?        Ambassador Daniel A. Sepulveda, Dy. Assistant Secretary of State & U.S. Coordinator for Int?l Communications, United States Govt.

?        Ms. Omobola Johnson,  Minister of Communications Technology, Govt. of Nigeria

?        Ms. Neelie Kroes,  European Commissioner for Digital Agenda, European Union

?        Mr. Jackson Miake,  Office of the Govt. CIO ? Prime Minister's Office, Govt. of the Republic of Vanuatu

?        Ms. Salam Yamout,  National ICT Strategy Coordinator, Presidency of the Council of Ministers, Govt. of Lebanon
(iii)           Civil Society

?        Dr. (Ms) Alison Gillwald,   Research ICT Africa, South Africa

?        Mr. Guo Liang,  Director & Associate Professor, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, China

?        Mr. Henri Malosse, President of the European Economic and Social Committee, EU

?        Ms. Joana Varon, Center for Technology & Society / Funda??o Get?lio Vargas, Brazil
(iv)          Technical Community

?        Ms. Kathryn Brown,   CEO, ISOC,

?        Mr. Mike Jensen,  Internet Access Specialist, Brazil APC, Brazil

?        Professor David Reed,  University of Colorado, USA

?        Mr. Rohan Samarajiva,  Chair, LIRNEasia, Sri Lanka
(v)          Private Sector

?        Mr. Hossam El-Gamal,  Board Member and Treasurer, AFICTA, Egypt

?        Mr. Rajan Mathews,  Director General, Cellular Operators Association of India, India

?        Ms.  Funke Opeke,  CEO Main One Ltd., Lagos, Nigeria
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trust this is helpful,

Regards,
Virat Bhatia







From: Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Fiona Alexander
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 4:21 PM
To: Subi Chaturvedi
Cc: MAG-public; evolintgov2014
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

I will check back with my USG colleagues but what is the difference between being on the panel and an intervention?

As a general matter,  at some point the MAG will need to look across the package of main sessions to ensure diversity of speakers.   Seems to be a lot of familiar names, multiple times.  Not for now, but perhaps the next cycle the MAG should consider developing main session guidelines.

-------- Original message --------
From: Subi Chaturvedi
Date:08/08/2014 6:39 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: Fiona Alexander
Cc: evolintgov2014 , MAG-public , Marilyn Cade
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew from the state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making an intervention from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn.

Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the first half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA transition. If the others are in agreement than your help in approaching him would be very welcome.

Regards

Subi



On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov<mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>> wrote:
I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one.

-------- Original message --------
From: William Drake
Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: evolintgov2014
Cc: MAG-public
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

Hi

I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...


Session title: As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc etc.

Descriptive text: what?s in the program paper seems dated.

Speakers/Moderators: [is the below still current?]


Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem*
      [including per Janis the NM Initiative]

Moderator: TBD

Panelists:

1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]

Panel 2: The Role of the IGF

1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]


Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now):

 *   Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
 *   Sam Dickinson (TC)

Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members for now):

Government/IGO:

 *   Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
 *   Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel 1?)
 *   Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)

 *   Norberto Berner (Argentina)
 *   Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
 *   Larry Strickling (US)
 *   Ed Vaizy (UK)
 *   Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
 *   Alice Munyua (AU)
Private Sector:

 *   Danil Kerimi (WEF)
 *   Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
 *   Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
 *   Phil Rushton (BT)
 *   Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
Technical Community:

 *   Jari Arkko (IETF)
 *   Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
 *   Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
 *   Byron Holland (CIRA)
 *   Geoff Huston (APNIC)
 *   Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
Civil Society:

 *   Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
 *   Stephanie Perrin (UT)
 *   Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
 *   Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
 *   Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
 *   Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
 *   Marilia Maciel (FGV)
 *   Adam Peake (Glocom)

Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?

Bill

On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:



Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.

regards

Subi

On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
Subi,

apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:

Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland
Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding Internet governance and advocacy of the multistakeholder approach have been treated with top priority by the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.

It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:  Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl<mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>

Best
Igor


On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:



Many thanks Igor.

Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.

Collecting it for all the speakers.

Regards

Subi


On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well
>
> Best
> Igor
>
>
> On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>
>> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out previously.
>>
>> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>
>> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>>
>> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>
>> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy questions.
>>
>> Suggestions pertaining to :
>> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum time for participation and interventions from the floor and non facilitators.
>> 2. Format:
>> A-no moderator
>> B-4 moderators
>> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience interventions only
>> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>> D. An open space
>>
>> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
>> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self nominations.  So we have them too.
>> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>
>> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>>
>> Any other inputs.
>>
>> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>
>> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Subi
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>


_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/c74d4140/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 07:48:39 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 17:18:39 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Query: [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session -
 Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>
References: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpKg1xCeAjt0qYBrn_YvJbpTnkLqGQBmft8ySTkvNjNdOA@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Jeanette for refreshing memory. But I believe there was some
discussion this year as well. I seem to have to have missed that thread.

Can Bill or someone please refresh memory on this list as to what we have
agreed to follow this year? As we have received speaking requests from MAG
members who are legitimate experts in their areas, and some have been
forward to us by the chair (regions would go unrepresented and have
substantive interventions to make). Others are recommendations from members
on this list and MAG volunteers working on this session.

regards

Subi


On 8 August 2014 17:10, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:

>
>
> Am 08.08.2014 13:32, schrieb Subi Chaturvedi:
>
>  SERVING MAG MEMBERS as panelists on Main sessions-
>>
>> Can we get clarity on this?
>>
>
> During the first years, when I was on the MAG it was considered
> inappropriate for MAG members to be on the panel of main sessions. Some of
> us served as moderators though. With the turnover of the MAG, this sense of
> inappropriateness vanished and for the following one or two years there
> were many MAG members on main sessions. I think the ban was then renewed.
>
> Generally I think it is difficult to invite individual MAG members to main
> sessions but tell others that they should not do this.
>
> jeanette
>
>
>> What is it that, we're following now?
>>
>> Is there a blanket ban on any serving MAG member being a panelist on the
>> MAIN sessions or are we making exceptions  where relevant?
>>
>> What is the sense of the group on this?
>>
>> warmest
>>
>> Subi
>> ----
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 8 August 2014 16:54, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>> <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Certainly Bill. As you would recall that's precisely what I have
>>     suggested. We plan to do that by C.O.B. today.
>>
>>     And as far as I am aware Ron hasn't been invited, though he has been
>>     on the original list from day 1. I do not have his contact details.
>>
>>     As far as Amb. Sepulveda is concerned , he was proposed by Marilyn
>>     after I believe a discussion with USG, she will be able to fill us
>>     in with more details. I did point out that he is on the access panel.
>>
>>     I have repeatedly asked for contact details of speakers proposed.
>>       And that helps.
>>
>>     The MAG list is still useful for this discussion for procedural
>>     inputs and institutional memory . Also many times people not
>>     subscribed to the list have made excellent contributions, so it's
>>     best to keep every one in the loop.
>>
>>     warmest
>>
>>     Subi
>>
>>
>>
>>     On 8 August 2014 16:49, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Hi again Subi
>>
>>         To facilitate the discussion, could you perhaps send to
>>         <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>         <mailto:evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>> the list of people you
>>
>>         and Marilyn have confirmed for the two panels to date, along
>>         with the list of names still under discussion (i.e. an
>>         update/correction of what I sent yesterday, below)?  I don?t
>>         recall the discussion of Danny Sepulveda, which is why Fiona and
>>         I were talking about Larry Strickling.  Obviously we can?t put
>>         two senior US government people in the same session.  Someone
>>         also just told me in a side conversation that Rob Deibert had
>>         been invited.  I didn?t know that either.  So please, if we
>>         could just synch files and keep a running up to date tab of
>>         who?s confirmed and who?s in play for the group to consider,
>>         that?d be really helpful.
>>
>>         I also agree with the suggestion that the MAG should perhaps set
>>         down a fixed procedure for how main sessions are to be managed.
>>           Let?s avoid any future unnecessary bits of confusion or
>>         disagreement about how we proceed with these.  If defined
>>         procedures are needed for workshop evaluation and selection,
>>         surely they?d be advisable for main sessions as well.
>>
>>         Thanks much,
>>
>>         Bill
>>
>>         PS: While the procedural discussion is of relevance to all MAG
>>         members, when we get to going back and forth on speakers we
>>         should probably spare everyone and keep it
>>         on <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>         <mailto:evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>>
>>
>>
>>
>>         On Aug 8, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>         <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>          Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with
>>>         Andrew from the state department that Ambassador Sepulveda
>>>         will be making an intervention from USG. He's been
>>>         coordinating this with Marilyn.
>>>
>>>         Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in
>>>         the first half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on
>>>         the IANA transition. If the others are in agreement than your
>>>         help in approaching him would be very welcome.
>>>
>>>         Regards
>>>
>>>         Subi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>         On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander
>>>         <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>             I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is
>>>             listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has
>>>             not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a
>>>             desire to have a US Government speaker please let me know
>>>             ASAP and we can find one.
>>>
>>>
>>>             -------- Original message --------
>>>             From: William Drake __
>>>             Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
>>>             To: evolintgov2014 __
>>>             Cc: MAG-public __
>>>             Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main
>>>             Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
>>>
>>>             Hi
>>>
>>>             I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding
>>>             with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a
>>>             few times the list of all names people had suggested as
>>>             possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was
>>>             sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been
>>>             no collective discussion about options and who might be
>>>             optimal on which panel. There have been a references to
>>>             bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG
>>>             members for speaking slots for themselves or their
>>>             colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few
>>>             confirmations that people invited previously have agreed
>>>             to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all
>>>             previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in
>>>             over the years worked in a more transparent and
>>>             participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I
>>>             just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It
>>>             would be good if we could move this forward to a solid
>>>             conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
>>>
>>>
>>>             *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus
>>>
>>>             Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role
>>>             of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU,
>>>             other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the
>>>             subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover
>>>             everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM
>>>             Initiative, etc etc.
>>>
>>>             *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
>>>
>>>             *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
>>>
>>>
>>>             *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
>>>
>>>                   [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
>>>
>>>             Moderator: TBD
>>>
>>>             Panelists:
>>>
>>>             1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
>>>             2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
>>>             3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
>>>
>>>             *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
>>>
>>>
>>>             1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
>>>             2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
>>>
>>>
>>>             Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG
>>>             members for now):
>>>
>>>               * Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
>>>               * Sam Dickinson (TC)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>             Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off
>>>             MAG members for now):
>>>
>>>             Government/IGO:
>>>
>>>               * Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>>>               * Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to
>>>                 Igor?for panel 1?)
>>>               * Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>>>
>>>               * Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>>>               * Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>>>               * Larry Strickling (US)
>>>               * Ed Vaizy (UK)
>>>               * Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>>>               * Alice Munyua (AU)
>>>
>>>             Private Sector:
>>>
>>>               * Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>>>               * Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>>>               * Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>>>               * Phil Rushton (BT)
>>>               * Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>>>
>>>             Technical Community:
>>>
>>>               * Jari Arkko (IETF)
>>>               * Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>>>               * Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>>>               * Byron Holland (CIRA)
>>>               * Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>>>               * Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>>>
>>>             Civil Society:
>>>
>>>               * Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>>>               * Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>>>               * Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>>>               * Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>>>               * Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>>>               * Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>>>               * Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>>>               * Adam Peake (Glocom)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>             Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
>>>
>>>             Bill
>>>
>>>             On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>             <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>>>             <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>             Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>>>>
>>>>             regards
>>>>
>>>>             Subi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>             On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski
>>>>             <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>                 Subi,
>>>>
>>>>                 apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>>>
>>>>                 /Minister of Administration and Digitalization,
>>>> Poland///
>>>>
>>>>                 /Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer
>>>>
>>>>                 specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member
>>>>                 of European Parliament, where he dealt with the
>>>>                 implementation of EU treaties and European Digital
>>>>                 Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues.
>>>>                 Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and
>>>>                 Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues
>>>>                 surrounding //Internet governance and advocacy of the
>>>>                 //multistakeholder/ /approach/ /have been treated
>>>>
>>>>                 with top priority by the Polish government.  Active
>>>>                 participation in the NetMundial conference and
>>>>                 creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his
>>>>                 recent activities./
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                 It's best to contact him thru the Head of his
>>>>                 Cabinet: Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>>>>                 <mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                 Best
>>>>                 Igor
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                 On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>>                 <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>>>>                 <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>                  Many thanks Igor.
>>>>>
>>>>>                 Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>>>
>>>>>                 Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>>>
>>>>>                 Regards
>>>>>
>>>>>                 Subi
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>                 On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski"
>>>>>                 <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
>>>>>                 <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
>>>>>                 >
>>>>>                 > Dear All,
>>>>>                 >
>>>>>                 > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL
>>>>>                 Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs
>>>>>                 confirmed his availability as well
>>>>>                 >
>>>>>                 > Best
>>>>>                 > Igor
>>>>>                 >
>>>>>                 >
>>>>>                 > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
>>>>>                 <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>>>>>                 <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>                 >
>>>>>                 >> Dear All,
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU)
>>>>>                 -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>>>>                 >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have
>>>>>                 confirmed their availability in addition to Ms.
>>>>>                 Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your
>>>>>                 organisation's participating. You've been copied on
>>>>>                 all mails which were sent out previously.
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads
>>>>>                 and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs
>>>>>                 along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada,
>>>>>                 Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus
>>>>>                 will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of
>>>>>                 options from accross stakeholder groups and some
>>>>>                 names for moderators to choose from.
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> All of them have been metaculously documented
>>>>>                 across several emails.
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> Today there will be discussion further on
>>>>>                 refining format and policy questions.
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>>>>                 >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so
>>>>>                 that we keep maximum time for participation and
>>>>>                 interventions from the floor and non facilitators.
>>>>>                 >> 2. Format:
>>>>>                 >> A-no moderator
>>>>>                 >> B-4 moderators
>>>>>                 >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3
>>>>>                 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions
>>>>>                 from different stakeholder groups for each of the
>>>>>                 two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>>>>>                 >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then
>>>>>                 open mic with audience interventions only
>>>>>                 >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>>>>                 >> D. An open space
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>>>>                 >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this
>>>>>                 week, since inputs have been received on session
>>>>>                 format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers
>>>>>                 can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice
>>>>>                 to block their calenders)
>>>>>                 >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some
>>>>>                 are self nominations.  So we have them too.
>>>>>                 >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are
>>>>>                 travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us
>>>>>                 too for the session? Would they like to nominate
>>>>>                 some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on
>>>>>                 core Internet values will have some.
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> Any other inputs.
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please
>>>>>                 feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> Regards
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> Subi
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 >> _______________________________________________
>>>>>                 >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>>>>                 >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>>>>>                 <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>>>>>                 >>
>>>>>                 http://mail.intgovforum.org/
>>>>> mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>>>>                 >
>>>>>                 >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>             _______________________________________________
>>>             Igfmaglist mailing list
>>>             Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist@
>>> intgovforum.org>
>>>
>>>             http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_
>>> intgovforum.org
>>>
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>         Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>         <mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>
>>>         http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/
>>> evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/
>> evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/ed87d247/attachment.htm>

From virat.bhatia at intl.att.com  Fri Aug  8 08:04:33 2014
From: virat.bhatia at intl.att.com (Bhatia, Virat)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 17:34:33 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Query: [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session -
 Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>
References: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>
Message-ID: <3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F15@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>



Dear Members of the MAG,

With regard to MAG members as panelists on mains sessions:

(i)      This subject has been discussed a lot, a few weeks ago. We all went back to our notes and everyone?s notes confirmed that in the February meeting, limits were discussed regarding MAG members on workshops.  No explicit discussion took place with regards to MAG members on main sessions.

(ii)    Janis finally intervened and agreed to a proposal of a maximum of 3 workshops and 1 main session for any MAG member for 2014.  This was also important because we have several first time MAG members who must get experience.

So as far as I know that is the mandate for 2014. Unless anyone wants to change it at this stage (3 weeks away from the IGF), which would mean having to recast the main sessions, to suit the new mandate.

Some believe that the role of a moderator is prominent.  Others believe the role of a speaker is prominent. This also very cultural.  In India for example, moderators are seen not to be a big deal since they are prohibited form expressing their views.  In other spaces, moderators are chairmen of the session. In our main session, we have chairmen provided for each main session from the Turkish Government.  So there are 3 distinct roles ? Chairman, Moderator(s) and Speakers.

I think if we can agree to Janis?s final prescription of 3 workshops + 1 main session for any MAG member, overlaid with the suggestion ?where relevant?, we should be able to move ahead.

Let individual MAG members decide on what type of restraint they wish to follow.

As for disclosure, I am on only 2 workshops and have refused a request to appear on best practices main session citing my role as a MAG member. On the other hand we are proud to invite 2 voices from the MAG, and one young lady from Fiji, as a remote moderator - all new voices.

Regards

Virat Bhatia



























-----Original Message-----
From: Evolintgov2014 [mailto:evolintgov2014-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Jeanette Hofmann
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 5:10 PM
To: Subi Chaturvedi; William Drake
Cc: Fiona Alexander; evolintgov2014; MAG-public
Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014] Query: [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update







Am 08.08.2014 13:32, schrieb Subi Chaturvedi:

> SERVING MAG MEMBERS as panelists on Main sessions-

>

> Can we get clarity on this?



During the first years, when I was on the MAG it was considered inappropriate for MAG members to be on the panel of main sessions. Some of us served as moderators though. With the turnover of the MAG, this sense of inappropriateness vanished and for the following one or two years there were many MAG members on main sessions. I think the ban was then renewed.



Generally I think it is difficult to invite individual MAG members to main sessions but tell others that they should not do this.



jeanette



>

> What is it that, we're following now?

>

> Is there a blanket ban on any serving MAG member being a panelist on

> the MAIN sessions or are we making exceptions  where relevant?

>

> What is the sense of the group on this?

>

> warmest

>

> Subi

> ----

>

>

>

>

> On 8 August 2014 16:54, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com

> <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:

>

>     Certainly Bill. As you would recall that's precisely what I have

>     suggested. We plan to do that by C.O.B. today.

>

>     And as far as I am aware Ron hasn't been invited, though he has been

>     on the original list from day 1. I do not have his contact details.

>

>     As far as Amb. Sepulveda is concerned , he was proposed by Marilyn

>     after I believe a discussion with USG, she will be able to fill us

>     in with more details. I did point out that he is on the access panel.

>

>     I have repeatedly asked for contact details of speakers proposed.

>       And that helps.

>

>     The MAG list is still useful for this discussion for procedural

>     inputs and institutional memory . Also many times people not

>     subscribed to the list have made excellent contributions, so it's

>     best to keep every one in the loop.

>

>     warmest

>

>     Subi

>

>

>

>     On 8 August 2014 16:49, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com

>     <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>> wrote:

>

>         Hi again Subi

>

>         To facilitate the discussion, could you perhaps send to

>         <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org

>         <mailto:evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>> the list of people you

>         and Marilyn have confirmed for the two panels to date, along

>         with the list of names still under discussion (i.e. an

>         update/correction of what I sent yesterday, below)?  I don?t

>         recall the discussion of Danny Sepulveda, which is why Fiona and

>         I were talking about Larry Strickling.  Obviously we can?t put

>         two senior US government people in the same session.  Someone

>         also just told me in a side conversation that Rob Deibert had

>         been invited.  I didn?t know that either.  So please, if we

>         could just synch files and keep a running up to date tab of

>         who?s confirmed and who?s in play for the group to consider,

>         that?d be really helpful.

>

>         I also agree with the suggestion that the MAG should perhaps set

>         down a fixed procedure for how main sessions are to be managed.

>           Let?s avoid any future unnecessary bits of confusion or

>         disagreement about how we proceed with these.  If defined

>         procedures are needed for workshop evaluation and selection,

>         surely they?d be advisable for main sessions as well.

>

>         Thanks much,

>

>         Bill

>

>         PS: While the procedural discussion is of relevance to all MAG

>         members, when we get to going back and forth on speakers we

>         should probably spare everyone and keep it

>         on <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org

>         <mailto:evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>>

>

>

>         On Aug 8, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Subi Chaturvedi

>         <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com%20%3cmailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>>> wrote:

>

>>         Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with

>>         Andrew from the state department that Ambassador Sepulveda

>>         will be making an intervention from USG. He's been

>>         coordinating this with Marilyn.

>>

>>         Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in

>>         the first half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on

>>         the IANA transition. If the others are in agreement than your

>>         help in approaching him would be very welcome.

>>

>>         Regards

>>

>>         Subi

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>         On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander

>>         <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov<mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov%20%3cmailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>>> wrote:

>>

>>             I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is

>>             listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has

>>             not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a

>>             desire to have a US Government speaker please let me know

>>             ASAP and we can find one.

>>

>>

>>             -------- Original message --------

>>             From: William Drake __

>>             Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)

>>             To: evolintgov2014 __

>>             Cc: MAG-public __

>>             Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main

>>             Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

>>

>>             Hi

>>

>>             I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding

>>             with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a

>>             few times the list of all names people had suggested as

>>             possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was

>>             sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been

>>             no collective discussion about options and who might be

>>             optimal on which panel. There have been a references to

>>             bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG

>>             members for speaking slots for themselves or their

>>             colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few

>>             confirmations that people invited previously have agreed

>>             to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all

>>             previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in

>>             over the years worked in a more transparent and

>>             participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I

>>             just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It

>>             would be good if we could move this forward to a solid

>>             conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...

>>

>>

>>             *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus

>>             Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role

>>             of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU,

>>             other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the

>>             subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover

>>             everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM

>>             Initiative, etc etc.

>>

>>             *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.

>>

>>             *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]

>>

>>

>>             *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**

>>                   [including per Janis the NM Initiative]

>>

>>             Moderator: TBD

>>

>>             Panelists:

>>

>>             1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]

>>             2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]

>>             3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]

>>

>>             *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*

>>

>>             1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]

>>             2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]

>>

>>

>>             Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG

>>             members for now):

>>

>>               * Jeanette Hofmann (CS)

>>               * Sam Dickinson (TC)

>>

>>

>>             Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off

>>             MAG members for now):

>>

>>             Government/IGO:

>>

>>               * Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]

>>               * Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to

>>                 Igor?for panel 1?)

>>               * Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)

>>

>>               * Norberto Berner (Argentina)

>>               * Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)

>>               * Larry Strickling (US)

>>               * Ed Vaizy (UK)

>>               * Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)

>>               * Alice Munyua (AU)

>>

>>             Private Sector:

>>

>>               * Danil Kerimi (WEF)

>>               * Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)

>>               * Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)

>>               * Phil Rushton (BT)

>>               * Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)

>>

>>             Technical Community:

>>

>>               * Jari Arkko (IETF)

>>               * Tim Berners Lee (W3C)

>>               * Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)

>>               * Byron Holland (CIRA)

>>               * Geoff Huston (APNIC)

>>               * Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)

>>

>>             Civil Society:

>>

>>               * Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)

>>               * Stephanie Perrin (UT)

>>               * Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)

>>               * Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)

>>               * Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)

>>               * Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)

>>               * Marilia Maciel (FGV)

>>               * Adam Peake (Glocom)

>>

>>

>>             Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?

>>

>>             Bill

>>

>>             On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi

>>             <subichaturvedi at gmail.com

>>             <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:

>>

>>>

>>>             Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.

>>>

>>>             regards

>>>

>>>             Subi

>>>

>>>

>>>             On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski

>>>             <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl%20%3cmailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>>> wrote:

>>>

>>>                 Subi,

>>>

>>>                 apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:

>>>

>>>                 /Minister of Administration and Digitalization,

>>> Poland///

>>>

>>>                 /Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer

>>>                 specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member

>>>                 of European Parliament, where he dealt with the

>>>                 implementation of EU treaties and European Digital

>>>                 Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues.

>>>                 Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and

>>>                 Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues

>>>                 surrounding //Internet governance and advocacy of the

>>>                 //multistakeholder/ /approach/ /have been treated

>>>                 with top priority by the Polish government.  Active

>>>                 participation in the NetMundial conference and

>>>                 creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his

>>>                 recent activities./

>>>

>>>

>>>                 It's best to contact him thru the Head of his

>>>                 Cabinet: Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl<mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>

>>>                 <mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>

>>>

>>>                 Best

>>>                 Igor

>>>

>>>

>>>                 On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi

>>>                 <subichaturvedi at gmail.com

>>>                 <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:

>>>

>>>>                 Many thanks Igor.

>>>>

>>>>                 Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.

>>>>

>>>>                 Collecting it for all the speakers.

>>>>

>>>>                 Regards

>>>>

>>>>                 Subi

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>                 On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski"

>>>>                 <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl

>>>>                 <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:

>>>>                 >

>>>>                 > Dear All,

>>>>                 >

>>>>                 > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL

>>>>                 Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs

>>>>                 confirmed his availability as well

>>>>                 >

>>>>                 > Best

>>>>                 > Igor

>>>>                 >

>>>>                 >

>>>>                 > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi

>>>>                 <subichaturvedi at gmail.com

>>>>                 <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:

>>>>                 >

>>>>                 >> Dear All,

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU)

>>>>                 -Stakeholder group-Gov.

>>>>                 >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have

>>>>                 confirmed their availability in addition to Ms.

>>>>                 Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your

>>>>                 organisation's participating. You've been copied on

>>>>                 all mails which were sent out previously.

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads

>>>>                 and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs

>>>>                 along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada,

>>>>                 Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus

>>>>                 will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of

>>>>                 options from accross stakeholder groups and some

>>>>                 names for moderators to choose from.

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> All of them have been metaculously documented

>>>>                 across several emails.

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> Your inputs have been most conducive.

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> Today there will be discussion further on

>>>>                 refining format and policy questions.

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> Suggestions pertaining to :

>>>>                 >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so

>>>>                 that we keep maximum time for participation and

>>>>                 interventions from the floor and non facilitators.

>>>>                 >> 2. Format:

>>>>                 >> A-no moderator

>>>>                 >> B-4 moderators

>>>>                 >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3

>>>>                 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions

>>>>                 from different stakeholder groups for each of the

>>>>                 two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.

>>>>                 >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then

>>>>                 open mic with audience interventions only

>>>>                 >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles

>>>>                 >> D. An open space

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you

>>>>                 >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this

>>>>                 week, since inputs have been received on session

>>>>                 format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers

>>>>                 can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice

>>>>                 to block their calenders)

>>>>                 >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some

>>>>                 are self nominations.  So we have them too.

>>>>                 >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are

>>>>                 travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us

>>>>                 too for the session? Would they like to nominate

>>>>                 some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on

>>>>                 core Internet values will have some.

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> Any other inputs.

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please

>>>>                 feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> We'll be updating the list soon.

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> Regards

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> Subi

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 >> _______________________________________________

>>>>                 >> Igfmaglist mailing list

>>>>                 >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>

>>>>                 <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>

>>>>                 >>

>>>>                 http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org

>>>>                 >

>>>>                 >

>>>>

>>

>>

>>             _______________________________________________

>>             Igfmaglist mailing list

>>             Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org> <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>

>>

>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.o

>> rg

>>

>>

>>         _______________________________________________

>>         Evolintgov2014 mailing list

>>         Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org<mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>

>>         <mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>

>>

>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovfor

>> um.org

>

>

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Evolintgov2014 mailing list

> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org<mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>

> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforu

> m.org

>



_______________________________________________

Evolintgov2014 mailing list

Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org<mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>

http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/7a8629e9/attachment.htm>

From wjdrake at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 09:13:56 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 15:13:56 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Query: [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session -
	Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F15@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
References: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F15@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
Message-ID: <84632B3F-AB1C-4527-9179-28D648B357A7@gmail.com>

Hi Virat

On Aug 8, 2014, at 2:04 PM, Bhatia, Virat <virat.bhatia at intl.att.com> wrote:

> Dear Members of the MAG,
> 
> With regard to MAG members as panelists on mains sessions:
> 
> (i)      This subject has been discussed a lot, a few weeks ago. We all went back to our notes and everyone?s notes confirmed that in the February meeting, limits were discussed regarding MAG members on workshops.  No explicit discussion took place with regards to MAG members on main sessions.

I?m not sure why we?re back here again, but as I replied to you on 23 July: The Feb. report states, "MAG members will not submit proposals but institutions associated with the MAG member are not prohibited.?  And members know to recuse themselves from evaluating workshops they?re speaking in.  But I don?t recall a discussion or agreement about limiting MAG members? participation in workshops to 3.  Insofar as there are probably somewhere upwards of 500 workshop speakers it?s not clear what the problem would be with someone?s name occurring 4 times instead of 3 etc.  I would think the point is for members to exercise prudence and not be all over the place, as has often occurred in the past.

I don?t know who went back to what notes thereafter and found what but the report summarizes our formal decisions.
> 
> (ii)    Janis finally intervened and agreed to a proposal of a maximum of 3 workshops and 1 main session for any MAG member for 2014.  This was also important because we have several first time MAG members who must get experience.

What Janis said was

On Jul 24, 2014, at 5:17 AM, karklinsj at gmail.com wrote:

> At the same time I am not in favor of a blanket ban of participation of MAG members in the substantive discussions, especially if invited by workshop organizers based on merits (expertise, experience, representation).
> Your proposal (1/3 max) might be a good indication for MAG members with understanding that the self-restrain principle would prevail and the MAG member would accept a role, especially in the main session, if no other speakers/moderators are available.

I did not take ?might be a good indication" as a hard and fast agreement that MAG members now cannot be on more than three workshops.  I don?t think people who?ve accepted speaking invitations unaware of this interpretation should now be forced to renege on their acceptances based on variable recollections of discussions, especially discussions that didn?t happen on the list where all can participate.  As Janis said, we should exercise self restraint, especially for main sessions.  If someone is really optimally placed to play a role and there?s no better alternative, fine.

Best

Bill

> 
> So as far as I know that is the mandate for 2014. Unless anyone wants to change it at this stage (3 weeks away from the IGF), which would mean having to recast the main sessions, to suit the new mandate.
> 
> Some believe that the role of a moderator is prominent.  Others believe the role of a speaker is prominent. This also very cultural.  In India for example, moderators are seen not to be a big deal since they are prohibited form expressing their views.  In other spaces, moderators are chairmen of the session. In our main session, we have chairmen provided for each main session from the Turkish Government.  So there are 3 distinct roles ? Chairman, Moderator(s) and Speakers.
> 
> I think if we can agree to Janis?s final prescription of 3 workshops + 1 main session for any MAG member, overlaid with the suggestion ?where relevant?, we should be able to move ahead.
> 
> Let individual MAG members decide on what type of restraint they wish to follow.
> 
> As for disclosure, I am on only 2 workshops and have refused a request to appear on best practices main session citing my role as a MAG member. On the other hand we are proud to invite 2 voices from the MAG, and one young lady from Fiji, as a remote moderator - all new voices.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Virat Bhatia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Evolintgov2014 [mailto:evolintgov2014-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Jeanette Hofmann
> Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 5:10 PM
> To: Subi Chaturvedi; William Drake
> Cc: Fiona Alexander; evolintgov2014; MAG-public
> Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014] Query: [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Am 08.08.2014 13:32, schrieb Subi Chaturvedi:
> 
>> SERVING MAG MEMBERS as panelists on Main sessions-
> 
>> 
> 
>> Can we get clarity on this?
> 
> 
> 
> During the first years, when I was on the MAG it was considered inappropriate for MAG members to be on the panel of main sessions. Some of us served as moderators though. With the turnover of the MAG, this sense of inappropriateness vanished and for the following one or two years there were many MAG members on main sessions. I think the ban was then renewed.
> 
> 
> 
> Generally I think it is difficult to invite individual MAG members to main sessions but tell others that they should not do this.
> 
> 
> 
> jeanette
> 
> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> What is it that, we're following now?
> 
>> 
> 
>> Is there a blanket ban on any serving MAG member being a panelist on
> 
>> the MAIN sessions or are we making exceptions  where relevant?
> 
>> 
> 
>> What is the sense of the group on this?
> 
>> 
> 
>> warmest
> 
>> 
> 
>> Subi
> 
>> ----
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> On 8 August 2014 16:54, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
> 
>> <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>> 
> 
>>    Certainly Bill. As you would recall that's precisely what I have
> 
>>    suggested. We plan to do that by C.O.B. today.
> 
>> 
> 
>>    And as far as I am aware Ron hasn't been invited, though he has been
> 
>>    on the original list from day 1. I do not have his contact details.
> 
>> 
> 
>>    As far as Amb. Sepulveda is concerned , he was proposed by Marilyn
> 
>>    after I believe a discussion with USG, she will be able to fill us
> 
>>    in with more details. I did point out that he is on the access panel.
> 
>> 
> 
>>    I have repeatedly asked for contact details of speakers proposed.
> 
>>      And that helps.
> 
>> 
> 
>>    The MAG list is still useful for this discussion for procedural
> 
>>    inputs and institutional memory . Also many times people not
> 
>>    subscribed to the list have made excellent contributions, so it's
> 
>>    best to keep every one in the loop.
> 
>> 
> 
>>    warmest
> 
>> 
> 
>>    Subi
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>>    On 8 August 2014 16:49, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com
> 
>>    <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>> 
> 
>>        Hi again Subi
> 
>> 
> 
>>        To facilitate the discussion, could you perhaps send to
> 
>>        <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> 
>>        <mailto:evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>> the list of people you
> 
>>        and Marilyn have confirmed for the two panels to date, along
> 
>>        with the list of names still under discussion (i.e. an
> 
>>        update/correction of what I sent yesterday, below)?  I don?t
> 
>>        recall the discussion of Danny Sepulveda, which is why Fiona and
> 
>>        I were talking about Larry Strickling.  Obviously we can?t put
> 
>>        two senior US government people in the same session.  Someone
> 
>>        also just told me in a side conversation that Rob Deibert had
> 
>>        been invited.  I didn?t know that either.  So please, if we
> 
>>        could just synch files and keep a running up to date tab of
> 
>>        who?s confirmed and who?s in play for the group to consider,
> 
>>        that?d be really helpful.
> 
>> 
> 
>>        I also agree with the suggestion that the MAG should perhaps set
> 
>>        down a fixed procedure for how main sessions are to be managed.
> 
>>          Let?s avoid any future unnecessary bits of confusion or
> 
>>        disagreement about how we proceed with these.  If defined
> 
>>        procedures are needed for workshop evaluation and selection,
> 
>>        surely they?d be advisable for main sessions as well.
> 
>> 
> 
>>        Thanks much,
> 
>> 
> 
>>        Bill
> 
>> 
> 
>>        PS: While the procedural discussion is of relevance to all MAG
> 
>>        members, when we get to going back and forth on speakers we
> 
>>        should probably spare everyone and keep it
> 
>>        on <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> 
>>        <mailto:evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>>
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>>        On Aug 8, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
> 
>>        <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com%20%3cmailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>>> wrote:
> 
>> 
> 
>>>        Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with
> 
>>>        Andrew from the state department that Ambassador Sepulveda
> 
>>>        will be making an intervention from USG. He's been
> 
>>>        coordinating this with Marilyn.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>        Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in
> 
>>>        the first half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on
> 
>>>        the IANA transition. If the others are in agreement than your
> 
>>>        help in approaching him would be very welcome.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>        Regards
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>        Subi
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>        On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander
> 
>>>        <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov<mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov%20%3cmailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov>>> wrote:
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is
> 
>>>            listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has
> 
>>>            not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a
> 
>>>            desire to have a US Government speaker please let me know
> 
>>>            ASAP and we can find one.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            -------- Original message --------
> 
>>>            From: William Drake __
> 
>>>            Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
> 
>>>            To: evolintgov2014 __
> 
>>>            Cc: MAG-public __
> 
>>>            Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main
> 
>>>            Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            Hi
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding
> 
>>>            with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a
> 
>>>            few times the list of all names people had suggested as
> 
>>>            possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was
> 
>>>            sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been
> 
>>>            no collective discussion about options and who might be
> 
>>>            optimal on which panel. There have been a references to
> 
>>>            bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG
> 
>>>            members for speaking slots for themselves or their
> 
>>>            colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few
> 
>>>            confirmations that people invited previously have agreed
> 
>>>            to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all
> 
>>>            previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in
> 
>>>            over the years worked in a more transparent and
> 
>>>            participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I
> 
>>>            just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It
> 
>>>            would be good if we could move this forward to a solid
> 
>>>            conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus
> 
>>>            Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role
> 
>>>            of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU,
> 
>>>            other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the
> 
>>>            subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover
> 
>>>            everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM
> 
>>>            Initiative, etc etc.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**
> 
>>>                  [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            Moderator: TBD
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            Panelists:
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
> 
>>>            2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
> 
>>>            3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
> 
>>>            2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG
> 
>>>            members for now):
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>              * Jeanette Hofmann (CS)
> 
>>>              * Sam Dickinson (TC)
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off
> 
>>>            MAG members for now):
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            Government/IGO:
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>              * Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
> 
>>>              * Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to
> 
>>>                Igor?for panel 1?)
> 
>>>              * Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>              * Norberto Berner (Argentina)
> 
>>>              * Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
> 
>>>              * Larry Strickling (US)
> 
>>>              * Ed Vaizy (UK)
> 
>>>              * Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
> 
>>>              * Alice Munyua (AU)
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            Private Sector:
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>              * Danil Kerimi (WEF)
> 
>>>              * Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
> 
>>>              * Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
> 
>>>              * Phil Rushton (BT)
> 
>>>              * Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            Technical Community:
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>              * Jari Arkko (IETF)
> 
>>>              * Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
> 
>>>              * Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
> 
>>>              * Byron Holland (CIRA)
> 
>>>              * Geoff Huston (APNIC)
> 
>>>              * Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            Civil Society:
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>              * Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
> 
>>>              * Stephanie Perrin (UT)
> 
>>>              * Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
> 
>>>              * Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
> 
>>>              * Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
> 
>>>              * Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
> 
>>>              * Marilia Maciel (FGV)
> 
>>>              * Adam Peake (Glocom)
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            Bill
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
> 
>>>            <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
> 
>>>            <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>            Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>            regards
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>            Subi
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>            On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski
> 
>>>>            <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl%20%3cmailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>>> wrote:
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>                Subi,
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>                apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>                /Minister of Administration and Digitalization,
> 
>>>> Poland///
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>                /Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer
> 
>>>>                specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member
> 
>>>>                of European Parliament, where he dealt with the
> 
>>>>                implementation of EU treaties and European Digital
> 
>>>>                Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues.
> 
>>>>                Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and
> 
>>>>                Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues
> 
>>>>                surrounding //Internet governance and advocacy of the
> 
>>>>                //multistakeholder/ /approach/ /have been treated
> 
>>>>                with top priority by the Polish government.  Active
> 
>>>>                participation in the NetMundial conference and
> 
>>>>                creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his
> 
>>>>                recent activities./
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>                It's best to contact him thru the Head of his
> 
>>>>                Cabinet: Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl<mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>
> 
>>>>                <mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>                Best
> 
>>>>                Igor
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>                On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
> 
>>>>                <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
> 
>>>>                <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>>                Many thanks Igor.
> 
>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>                Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
> 
>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>                Collecting it for all the speakers.
> 
>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>                Regards
> 
>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>                Subi
> 
>>>>> 
> 
>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>                On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski"
> 
>>>>>                <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl
> 
>>>>>                <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:
> 
>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>> Dear All,
> 
>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>> Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL
> 
>>>>>                Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs
> 
>>>>>                confirmed his availability as well
> 
>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>> Best
> 
>>>>>> Igor
> 
>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>> On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi
> 
>>>>>                <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
> 
>>>>>                <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> Dear All,
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU)
> 
>>>>>                -Stakeholder group-Gov.
> 
>>>>>>> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have
> 
>>>>>                confirmed their availability in addition to Ms.
> 
>>>>>                Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your
> 
>>>>>                organisation's participating. You've been copied on
> 
>>>>>                all mails which were sent out previously.
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads
> 
>>>>>                and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs
> 
>>>>>                along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada,
> 
>>>>>                Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus
> 
>>>>>                will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of
> 
>>>>>                options from accross stakeholder groups and some
> 
>>>>>                names for moderators to choose from.
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> All of them have been metaculously documented
> 
>>>>>                across several emails.
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> Your inputs have been most conducive.
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> Today there will be discussion further on
> 
>>>>>                refining format and policy questions.
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> Suggestions pertaining to :
> 
>>>>>>> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so
> 
>>>>>                that we keep maximum time for participation and
> 
>>>>>                interventions from the floor and non facilitators.
> 
>>>>>>> 2. Format:
> 
>>>>>>> A-no moderator
> 
>>>>>>> B-4 moderators
> 
>>>>>>> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3
> 
>>>>>                mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions
> 
>>>>>                from different stakeholder groups for each of the
> 
>>>>>                two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
> 
>>>>>>> D. A general chair some disucussants and then
> 
>>>>>                open mic with audience interventions only
> 
>>>>>>> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
> 
>>>>>>> D. An open space
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
> 
>>>>>>> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this
> 
>>>>>                week, since inputs have been received on session
> 
>>>>>                format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers
> 
>>>>>                can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice
> 
>>>>>                to block their calenders)
> 
>>>>>>> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some
> 
>>>>>                are self nominations.  So we have them too.
> 
>>>>>>> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are
> 
>>>>>                travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us
> 
>>>>>                too for the session? Would they like to nominate
> 
>>>>>                some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on
> 
>>>>>                core Internet values will have some.
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> Any other inputs.
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please
> 
>>>>>                feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> We'll be updating the list soon.
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> Regards
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> Subi
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> 
>>>>>>> Igfmaglist mailing list
> 
>>>>>>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
> 
>>>>>                <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
> 
>>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>                http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> 
>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>>> 
> 
>>>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>            _______________________________________________
> 
>>>            Igfmaglist mailing list
> 
>>>            Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org> <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.o
> 
>>> rg
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>        _______________________________________________
> 
>>>        Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> 
>>>        Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org<mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>
> 
>>>        <mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovfor
> 
>>> um.org
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> _______________________________________________
> 
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> 
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org<mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>
> 
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforu
> 
>> m.org
> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> 
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org<mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>
> 
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
> <winmail.dat>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/da52fa2e/attachment.htm>

From virat.bhatia at intl.att.com  Fri Aug  8 09:42:28 2014
From: virat.bhatia at intl.att.com (Bhatia, Virat)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 19:12:28 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Query: [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session -
 Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <84632B3F-AB1C-4527-9179-28D648B357A7@gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F15@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
	<84632B3F-AB1C-4527-9179-28D648B357A7@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F7C@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>

Hi Bill,
From everything you have mentioned, we are in complete agreement.
Let me explain.
MAG members on main session

(i)      My comments are purely aimed at responding to the questions raised by Subi in her email ?regarding serving MAG members as panelists on a main session? to which Jeanette provided a response, and Subi acknowledged, seeking comments to ?refresh memory?.  I guess she is trying to decide on whether or not MAG members can accept a speaking / moderator roles on the main session she is helping to organize.



(ii)    On the issue of main sessions, Janis, you, I and I believe everyone, agreed to keep the limit to 1 for 2014 IGF, based on his email of July 24, which you have quoted below. There is no quarrel on that issue. In fact your email quoting Janis reinforces my point and gives clear guidance for the organizers of main sessions.

MAG members on workshops
I have neither mentioned in my email,  nor wish by any means, to recommend that MAG members, who have accepted speaker roles for 3-4 or in some cases, even 5 workshops, should decline at this stage.  That would be terrible for the organizers of those workshops.  My point was limited to responding to the query about MAG members on main sessions only.
 The fact that I am on 2 workshops is only self-disclosure.  It is by no means an imposition on others, since their commitments, in any event, were made much before Janis?s email to workshop organizers, and must be honored. Like you, I don?t see Janis?s email of ?1/3 max? as a hard and fast, where MAG members on workshops are concerned.
I hope this settles the issue for all organizers and MAG members unless anyone has a different interpretation from what has been agreed here.
Regards
Virat Bhatia


From: William Drake [mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 6:44 PM
To: Bhatia, Virat
Cc: Jeanette Hofmann; Subi Chaturvedi; Fiona Alexander; evolintgov2014; MAG-public
Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014] Query: [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

Hi Virat
On Aug 8, 2014, at 2:04 PM, Bhatia, Virat <virat.bhatia at intl.att.com<mailto:virat.bhatia at intl.att.com>> wrote:


Dear Members of the MAG,

With regard to MAG members as panelists on mains sessions:

(i)      This subject has been discussed a lot, a few weeks ago. We all went back to our notes and everyone?s notes confirmed that in the February meeting, limits were discussed regarding MAG members on workshops.  No explicit discussion took place with regards to MAG members on main sessions.

I?m not sure why we?re back here again, but as I replied to you on 23 July: The Feb. report states, "MAG members will not submit proposals but institutions associated with the MAG member are not prohibited.?  And members know to recuse themselves from evaluating workshops they?re speaking in.  But I don?t recall a discussion or agreement about limiting MAG members? participation in workshops to 3.  Insofar as there are probably somewhere upwards of 500 workshop speakers it?s not clear what the problem would be with someone?s name occurring 4 times instead of 3 etc.  I would think the point is for members to exercise prudence and not be all over the place, as has often occurred in the past.

I don?t know who went back to what notes thereafter and found what but the report summarizes our formal decisions.


(ii)    Janis finally intervened and agreed to a proposal of a maximum of 3 workshops and 1 main session for any MAG member for 2014.  This was also important because we have several first time MAG members who must get experience.

What Janis said was

On Jul 24, 2014, at 5:17 AM, karklinsj at gmail.com<mailto:karklinsj at gmail.com> wrote:


At the same time I am not in favor of a blanket ban of participation of MAG members in the substantive discussions, especially if invited by workshop organizers based on merits (expertise, experience, representation).
Your proposal (1/3 max) might be a good indication for MAG members with understanding that the self-restrain principle would prevail and the MAG member would accept a role, especially in the main session, if no other speakers/moderators are available.

I did not take ?might be a good indication" as a hard and fast agreement that MAG members now cannot be on more than three workshops.  I don?t think people who?ve accepted speaking invitations unaware of this interpretation should now be forced to renege on their acceptances based on variable recollections of discussions, especially discussions that didn?t happen on the list where all can participate.  As Janis said, we should exercise self restraint, especially for main sessions.  If someone is really optimally placed to play a role and there?s no better alternative, fine.

Best

Bill


So as far as I know that is the mandate for 2014. Unless anyone wants to change it at this stage (3 weeks away from the IGF), which would mean having to recast the main sessions, to suit the new mandate.

Some believe that the role of a moderator is prominent.  Others believe the role of a speaker is prominent. This also very cultural.  In India for example, moderators are seen not to be a big deal since they are prohibited form expressing their views.  In other spaces, moderators are chairmen of the session. In our main session, we have chairmen provided for each main session from the Turkish Government.  So there are 3 distinct roles ? Chairman, Moderator(s) and Speakers.

I think if we can agree to Janis?s final prescription of 3 workshops + 1 main session for any MAG member, overlaid with the suggestion ?where relevant?, we should be able to move ahead.

Let individual MAG members decide on what type of restraint they wish to follow.

As for disclosure, I am on only 2 workshops and have refused a request to appear on best practices main session citing my role as a MAG member. On the other hand we are proud to invite 2 voices from the MAG, and one young lady from Fiji, as a remote moderator - all new voices.

Regards

Virat Bhatia



























-----Original Message-----
From: Evolintgov2014 [mailto:evolintgov2014-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Jeanette Hofmann
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 5:10 PM
To: Subi Chaturvedi; William Drake
Cc: Fiona Alexander; evolintgov2014; MAG-public
Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014] Query: [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update







Am 08.08.2014 13:32, schrieb Subi Chaturvedi:


SERVING MAG MEMBERS as panelists on Main sessions-





Can we get clarity on this?



During the first years, when I was on the MAG it was considered inappropriate for MAG members to be on the panel of main sessions. Some of us served as moderators though. With the turnover of the MAG, this sense of inappropriateness vanished and for the following one or two years there were many MAG members on main sessions. I think the ban was then renewed.



Generally I think it is difficult to invite individual MAG members to main sessions but tell others that they should not do this.



jeanette







What is it that, we're following now?





Is there a blanket ban on any serving MAG member being a panelist on


the MAIN sessions or are we making exceptions  where relevant?





What is the sense of the group on this?





warmest





Subi


----














On 8 August 2014 16:54, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>


<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:





   Certainly Bill. As you would recall that's precisely what I have


   suggested. We plan to do that by C.O.B. today.





   And as far as I am aware Ron hasn't been invited, though he has been


   on the original list from day 1. I do not have his contact details.





   As far as Amb. Sepulveda is concerned , he was proposed by Marilyn


   after I believe a discussion with USG, she will be able to fill us


   in with more details. I did point out that he is on the access panel.





   I have repeatedly asked for contact details of speakers proposed.


     And that helps.





   The MAG list is still useful for this discussion for procedural


   inputs and institutional memory . Also many times people not


   subscribed to the list have made excellent contributions, so it's


   best to keep every one in the loop.





   warmest





   Subi











   On 8 August 2014 16:49, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com<mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>


   <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>> wrote:





       Hi again Subi





       To facilitate the discussion, could you perhaps send to


       <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org<mailto:evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>


       <mailto:evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>> the list of people you


       and Marilyn have confirmed for the two panels to date, along


       with the list of names still under discussion (i.e. an


       update/correction of what I sent yesterday, below)?  I don?t


       recall the discussion of Danny Sepulveda, which is why Fiona and


       I were talking about Larry Strickling.  Obviously we can?t put


       two senior US government people in the same session.  Someone


       also just told me in a side conversation that Rob Deibert had


       been invited.  I didn?t know that either.  So please, if we


       could just synch files and keep a running up to date tab of


       who?s confirmed and who?s in play for the group to consider,


       that?d be really helpful.





       I also agree with the suggestion that the MAG should perhaps set


       down a fixed procedure for how main sessions are to be managed.


         Let?s avoid any future unnecessary bits of confusion or


       disagreement about how we proceed with these.  If defined


       procedures are needed for workshop evaluation and selection,


       surely they?d be advisable for main sessions as well.





       Thanks much,





       Bill





       PS: While the procedural discussion is of relevance to all MAG


       members, when we get to going back and forth on speakers we


       should probably spare everyone and keep it


       on <evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org<mailto:evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>


       <mailto:evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>>








       On Aug 8, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Subi Chaturvedi


       <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com> <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com%20%3cmailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com<http://gmail.com>>>> wrote:





       Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with


       Andrew from the state department that Ambassador Sepulveda


       will be making an intervention from USG. He's been


       coordinating this with Marilyn.





       Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in


       the first half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on


       the IANA transition. If the others are in agreement than your


       help in approaching him would be very welcome.





       Regards





       Subi














       On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander


       <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov<mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov> <mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov<mailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov%20%3cmailto:FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov<http://ntia.doc.gov>>>> wrote:





           I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is


           listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has


           not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a


           desire to have a US Government speaker please let me know


           ASAP and we can find one.








           -------- Original message --------


           From: William Drake __


           Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)


           To: evolintgov2014 __


           Cc: MAG-public __


           Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main


           Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update





           Hi





           I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding


           with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a


           few times the list of all names people had suggested as


           possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was


           sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been


           no collective discussion about options and who might be


           optimal on which panel. There have been a references to


           bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG


           members for speaking slots for themselves or their


           colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few


           confirmations that people invited previously have agreed


           to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all


           previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in


           over the years worked in a more transparent and


           participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I


           just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It


           would be good if we could move this forward to a solid


           conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...








           *Session title:* As suggested previously, "Main/Focus


           Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role


           of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU,


           other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the


           subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover


           everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM


           Initiative, etc etc.





           *Descriptive text:* what?s in the program paper seems dated.





           *Speakers/Moderators:* [is the below still current?]








           *Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem**


                 [including per Janis the NM Initiative]





           Moderator: TBD





           Panelists:





           1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]


           2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]


           3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]





           *Panel 2: The Role of the IGF*





           1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]


           2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]








           Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG


           members for now):





             * Jeanette Hofmann (CS)


             * Sam Dickinson (TC)








           Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off


           MAG members for now):





           Government/IGO:





             * Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]


             * Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to


               Igor?for panel 1?)


             * Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)





             * Norberto Berner (Argentina)


             * Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)


             * Larry Strickling (US)


             * Ed Vaizy (UK)


             * Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)


             * Alice Munyua (AU)





           Private Sector:





             * Danil Kerimi (WEF)


             * Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)


             * Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)


             * Phil Rushton (BT)


             * Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)





           Technical Community:





             * Jari Arkko (IETF)


             * Tim Berners Lee (W3C)


             * Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)


             * Byron Holland (CIRA)


             * Geoff Huston (APNIC)


             * Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)





           Civil Society:





             * Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)


             * Stephanie Perrin (UT)


             * Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)


             * Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)


             * Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)


             * Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)


             * Marilia Maciel (FGV)


             * Adam Peake (Glocom)








           Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?





           Bill





           On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi


           <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>


           <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:








           Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.





           regards





           Subi








           On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski


           <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl%20%3cmailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>>> wrote:





               Subi,





               apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:





               /Minister of Administration and Digitalization,


Poland///





               /Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer


               specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member


               of European Parliament, where he dealt with the


               implementation of EU treaties and European Digital


               Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues.


               Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and


               Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues


               surrounding //Internet governance and advocacy of the


               //multistakeholder/ /approach/ /have been treated


               with top priority by the Polish government.  Active


               participation in the NetMundial conference and


               creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his


               recent activities./








               It's best to contact him thru the Head of his


               Cabinet: Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl<mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl><mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>


               <mailto:Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl>





               Best


               Igor








               On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi


               <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>


               <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:





               Many thanks Igor.





               Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.





               Collecting it for all the speakers.





               Regards





               Subi








               On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski"


               <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl<mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>


               <mailto:igor at ostrowski.waw.pl>> wrote:





Dear All,





Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL


               Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs


               confirmed his availability as well





Best


Igor








On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi


               <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>


               <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:





Dear All,





Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU)


               -Stakeholder group-Gov.


And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have


               confirmed their availability in addition to Ms.


               Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.





Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your


               organisation's participating. You've been copied on


               all mails which were sent out previously.





There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads


               and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs


               along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada,


               Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus


               will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of


               options from accross stakeholder groups and some


               names for moderators to choose from.





All of them have been metaculously documented


               across several emails.





Your inputs have been most conducive.





Today there will be discussion further on


               refining format and policy questions.





Suggestions pertaining to :


1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so


               that we keep maximum time for participation and


               interventions from the floor and non facilitators.


2. Format:


A-no moderator


B-4 moderators


C-deep well with identified interventions for 3


               mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions


               from different stakeholder groups for each of the


               two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.


D. A general chair some disucussants and then


               open mic with audience interventions only


E. A roundtable with concentric circles


D. An open space





3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you


(We hope to send out invites by the end of this


               week, since inputs have been received on session


               format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers


               can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice


               to block their calenders)


(Olga I have your recommendations down) and some


               are self nominations.  So we have them too.


Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.





4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are


               travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us


               too for the session? Would they like to nominate


               some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on


               core Internet values will have some.





Any other inputs.





If anybody else wishes to join the call, please


               feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.





We'll be updating the list soon.





Regards





Subi





_______________________________________________


Igfmaglist mailing list


Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org><mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>


               <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>





               http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org

















           _______________________________________________


           Igfmaglist mailing list


           Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org><mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org> <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>





http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.o


rg








       _______________________________________________


       Evolintgov2014 mailing list


       Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org<mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org><mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>


       <mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>





http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovfor


um.org<http://um.org>

















_______________________________________________


Evolintgov2014 mailing list


Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org<mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org><mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>


http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforu


m.org<http://m.org>






_______________________________________________

Evolintgov2014 mailing list

Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org<mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org><mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>

http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
<winmail.dat>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/c618dc58/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 11:14:15 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 20:44:15 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <A33FBEA7-5743-4335-907A-08117F36467B@Malcolm.id.au>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<79EFD8D4-B9CB-40B9-8742-C31EE553D2AC@glocom.ac.jp>
	<A33FBEA7-5743-4335-907A-08117F36467B@Malcolm.id.au>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpJ0GFLQBjTzfGVLkGUGFL+ADR8VUtJZ0HO0Dgyaimf4Gw@mail.gmail.com>

Resent the invite at the address mentioned by Adam. No trouble at all
Jeremy :) Resent the  invite at the eff address as well. Hope you can make
it. And a big shout out for EFF.
You make life better for all of us.

Regards

Subi

On 8 Aug 2014 20:37, "Jeremy Malcolm" <Jeremy at malcolm.id.au> wrote:
>
> Sorry that you have had trouble contacting me. Indeed my email address
has changed along with my job. My new work address is jmalcolm at eff.org.
>
> --
> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com
> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek
> echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - -O -
>
> > On Aug 8, 2014, at 2:39 AM, Adam <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Bill.
> >
> > I'd be happy to help out, contribute if I can -- have some idea of
WSIS/IGF/NETmundial.
> >
> > But person I'd personally like to hear from is Marilaia Maciel.  She's
been following most of the relevant activities, and very involved in
coordinating the roadmap section of the NETmundial document (I spent more
time on principles.)  I think there's been some misunderstanding about
NETmundial's suggestions regarding the IGF, and she may put those straight.
> >
> > Adam
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Aug 8, 2014, at 5:54 PM, Subi Chaturvedi wrote:
> >>
> >> Bill I am glad that we are in agreement then. All your suggestions
have duly incorporated.  And that is indeed the process followed.
Respectfully, I disagree with your statement that any attempt is being made
to do this in a manner which is top down. And it is unfair to constantly
claim otherwise. All of us have multiple things to do and we're all doing
this voluntarily. Yet we have neither discouraged any member from
contributing nor have we ignored any inputs. I am aware of your immense
expertise and contribution in this space. And we're all still learning. But
this doesn't help. All constructive inputs are welcome. Like the IGF we do
not want the IGF MAG to remain a decision making platform for a select few
and by a select few. This would only result in a chilling effect for new
MAG members, who are trying their best to contribute and create. It has
been a constant effort to divest the aura of a club.
> >>
> >> We have sent out multiple calls for inputs and suggestions, invites to
join calls. And when inputs have been received they have all been
incorporated and responded to. You asked us to stop inviting speakers after
our initial calls for specific names remained unresponded to, we did
exactly that.  Sent out a fresh call again for inputs.
> >>
> >> The people you have listed are indeed the people who have been
approached as speakers. Geoff Huston from the technical community is a new
and welcome addition. I do not have his contact details would be grateful
if either you or Paul can connect us with him.
> >>
> >> You will recall my multiple emails on this list for specific inputs
and threads and for seeking contact details including email ids and contact
details of all the speakers, volunteers are recommending.
> >>
> >> Every single suggestion has been incorporated received from all MAG
volunteers working on this session.
> >>
> >> Jeremy's emails seem to be bouncing back. Would be grateful if you can
provide us an alternative mail. We have reached out to him multiple times
at      jeremy at ciroap.org
> >>
> >> Thank you again for actively contributing on this session. I look
forward to any inputs that you might have further to make this session
better and more meaningful.
> >>
> >> regards
> >>
> >> Subi
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 8 August 2014 13:56, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Subi
> >>
> >>> On Aug 8, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This year as MAG members we then volunteered through a doodle poll
for the mains on which we wished to contribute more actively than others.
> >>>
> >>> Every session then had ranging from 1- 2 and sometimes 4 co-leads
from amongst MAG members.
> >>>
> >>> With about 16-18 volunteers per session.
> >>>
> >>> Over several emails on the MAG list and individual calls and emails,
inputs have been contributed. Every main has then gone on to organically
synthesise these inputs. Some through a single mail and others through a
series of continuous engagements. The water is being carried across
different mains who have volunteered to coherently assimilate inputs
received.
> >>>
> >>> Once a call for inputs is put out regarding specific requests the
co-leads generally wait within reason for specific inputs and specific
threads and then for the purpose of delivery and operationalisation of
actual logistical work  move the work along.
> >>
> >> The problem here is what 'move the work along' means.  With respect to
inviting panelists, the consistent, standard practice of the MAG over the
past decade has been that the lead facilitators keep a running track of the
list of suggested names (actually, I had to step in and do that here), pose
choices to the group, people weigh in and the group reaches consensus, and
then the facilitators reach out to speakers and keep the list continuously
informed as to the status?who?s accepted or not, what decision might need
to be made accordingly. No collective decision to change these
long-standing transparent and inclusive procedures was taken.  But it seems
that your model is that people provide input and then the two first moving
facilitators go off and make the decisions, often informing the group only
when pestered for answers.  This is really just not how it works, sorry.
> >>
> >> There are a number of outstanding choices to be made in filling out
the panels.  Suggestions have been made by participants.  Let?s please
follow the long-standing practice in making decisions from here.
> >>
> >> I reiterate for reference my suggestions of Jeanette and Samantha
Dickinson as moderators, Larry Strickling (govt) and Geoff Huston (TC) for
the ecosystem panel, and Jeremy Malcolm or Adam Peake (CS) for the IGF
panel.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Bill
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> >> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> >>
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/59085c60/attachment.htm>

From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au  Fri Aug  8 11:07:11 2014
From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 08:07:11 -0700
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <79EFD8D4-B9CB-40B9-8742-C31EE553D2AC@glocom.ac.jp>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpJLHVXU_4_k_GJ8x0i3ZLjzxzE
	8ZeBn3WiVkDFzpCTZVw@mail.gmail.com>
	<79EFD8D4-B9CB-40B9-8742-C31EE553D2AC@glocom.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <A33FBEA7-5743-4335-907A-08117F36467B@Malcolm.id.au>

Sorry that you have had trouble contacting me. Indeed my email address has changed along with my job. My new work address is jmalcolm at eff.org. 

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com
Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek 
echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - -O -

> On Aug 8, 2014, at 2:39 AM, Adam <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
> 
> Thanks Bill.
> 
> I'd be happy to help out, contribute if I can -- have some idea of WSIS/IGF/NETmundial.
> 
> But person I'd personally like to hear from is Marilaia Maciel.  She's been following most of the relevant activities, and very involved in coordinating the roadmap section of the NETmundial document (I spent more time on principles.)  I think there's been some misunderstanding about NETmundial's suggestions regarding the IGF, and she may put those straight. 
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 8, 2014, at 5:54 PM, Subi Chaturvedi wrote:
>> 
>> Bill I am glad that we are in agreement then. All your suggestions have duly incorporated.  And that is indeed the process followed. Respectfully, I disagree with your statement that any attempt is being made to do this in a manner which is top down. And it is unfair to constantly claim otherwise. All of us have multiple things to do and we're all doing this voluntarily. Yet we have neither discouraged any member from contributing nor have we ignored any inputs. I am aware of your immense expertise and contribution in this space. And we're all still learning. But this doesn't help. All constructive inputs are welcome. Like the IGF we do not want the IGF MAG to remain a decision making platform for a select few and by a select few. This would only result in a chilling effect for new MAG members, who are trying their best to contribute and create. It has been a constant effort to divest the aura of a club. 
>> 
>> We have sent out multiple calls for inputs and suggestions, invites to join calls. And when inputs have been received they have all been incorporated and responded to. You asked us to stop inviting speakers after our initial calls for specific names remained unresponded to, we did exactly that.  Sent out a fresh call again for inputs.
>> 
>> The people you have listed are indeed the people who have been approached as speakers. Geoff Huston from the technical community is a new and welcome addition. I do not have his contact details would be grateful if either you or Paul can connect us with him. 
>> 
>> You will recall my multiple emails on this list for specific inputs and threads and for seeking contact details including email ids and contact details of all the speakers, volunteers are recommending. 
>> 
>> Every single suggestion has been incorporated received from all MAG volunteers working on this session. 
>> 
>> Jeremy's emails seem to be bouncing back. Would be grateful if you can provide us an alternative mail. We have reached out to him multiple times at      jeremy at ciroap.org
>> 
>> Thank you again for actively contributing on this session. I look forward to any inputs that you might have further to make this session better and more meaningful.
>> 
>> regards
>> 
>> Subi
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 8 August 2014 13:56, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Subi
>> 
>>> On Aug 8, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> This year as MAG members we then volunteered through a doodle poll for the mains on which we wished to contribute more actively than others.
>>> 
>>> Every session then had ranging from 1- 2 and sometimes 4 co-leads from amongst MAG members.
>>> 
>>> With about 16-18 volunteers per session.
>>> 
>>> Over several emails on the MAG list and individual calls and emails, inputs have been contributed. Every main has then gone on to organically synthesise these inputs. Some through a single mail and others through a series of continuous engagements. The water is being carried across different mains who have volunteered to coherently assimilate inputs received.
>>> 
>>> Once a call for inputs is put out regarding specific requests the co-leads generally wait within reason for specific inputs and specific threads and then for the purpose of delivery and operationalisation of actual logistical work  move the work along.
>> 
>> The problem here is what 'move the work along' means.  With respect to inviting panelists, the consistent, standard practice of the MAG over the past decade has been that the lead facilitators keep a running track of the list of suggested names (actually, I had to step in and do that here), pose choices to the group, people weigh in and the group reaches consensus, and then the facilitators reach out to speakers and keep the list continuously informed as to the status?who?s accepted or not, what decision might need to be made accordingly. No collective decision to change these long-standing transparent and inclusive procedures was taken.  But it seems that your model is that people provide input and then the two first moving facilitators go off and make the decisions, often informing the group only when pestered for answers.  This is really just not how it works, sorry.
>> 
>> There are a number of outstanding choices to be made in filling out the panels.  Suggestions have been made by participants.  Let?s please follow the long-standing practice in making decisions from here.
>> 
>> I reiterate for reference my suggestions of Jeanette and Samantha Dickinson as moderators, Larry Strickling (govt) and Geoff Huston (TC) for the ecosystem panel, and Jeremy Malcolm or Adam Peake (CS) for the IGF panel.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Bill
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
> 



From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Fri Aug  8 13:22:20 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 13:22:20 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session -
	Evolution	of	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <kw287iq61mx23hnh0fwyta19.1407408884092@email.android.com>
References: <kw287iq61mx23hnh0fwyta19.1407408884092@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <BAY406-EAS3832D8676BEFC630F7F5DEDD3EE0@phx.gbl>

Subi and I have just had an extensive working session and are preparing a final proposed version with speakers who are confirmed, and with other updates. Thanks to all who are offering positive and productive suggestions.  

Also, we are all well aware that this session fits into the larger organic organization of the IGF itself, and we are of course, keeping up to date with Day 0 sessions,and other sessions that this session will either reflect from [such as workshops] or Open Forums, Day 0 sessions.

When we send out our next Version, I ask that if you think that you are participating in a Day 0 session or Workshop of relevance that we might have not identified, do share that information directly with me, and I'll compile a list that others can pick over, if they think I leave a workshop or open forum off the 'related events' list. 

Thanks for your positive and productive contributions and to the privilege it is to collaborate with all MAG members and others from the broader IG community who are committed to making the IGF Istanbul a great success. 

Marilyn Cade

> -------- Original message --------
> From: William Drake
> Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
> To: evolintgov2014
> Cc: MAG-public
> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
> 
> Hi
> 
> I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...
> 
> 
> Session title: As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc etc.
> 
> Descriptive text: what?s in the program paper seems dated.
> 
> Speakers/Moderators: [is the below still current?]
> 
> 
> Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem*
>       [including per Janis the NM Initiative]
> 
> Moderator: TBD  
> 
> Panelists:
> 
> 1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
> 2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
> 3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]
> 
> Panel 2: The Role of the IGF
>  
> 1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
> 2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]
> 
> 
> Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now): 
> Jeanette Hofmann (CS) 
> Sam Dickinson (TC)
> 
> Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members for now): 
> 
> Government/IGO:
> Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
> Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel 1?)
> Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
> Norberto Berner (Argentina)
> Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
> Larry Strickling (US)
> Ed Vaizy (UK)
> Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
> Alice Munyua (AU)
> Private Sector:
> Danil Kerimi (WEF)
> Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
> Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
> Phil Rushton (BT)
> Jimson Olufuye (WITSA) 
> Technical Community:
> Jari Arkko (IETF)
> Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
> Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
> Byron Holland (CIRA)
> Geoff Huston (APNIC)
> Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
> Civil Society:
> Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
> Stephanie Perrin (UT)
> Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
> Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
> Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
> Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
> Marilia Maciel (FGV)
> Adam Peake (Glocom)
> 
> Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?
> 
> Bill
> 
>> On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.
>> 
>> regards
>> 
>> Subi
>> 
>> 
>>> On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>>> Subi,
>>> 
>>> apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:
>>> 
>>> Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland
>>> 
>>> Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding Internet governance and advocacy of the multistakeholder approach have been treated with top priority by the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:  Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl
>>> 
>>> Best
>>> Igor
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Many thanks Igor.
>>>> 
>>>> Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.
>>>> 
>>>> Collecting it for all the speakers.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards
>>>> 
>>>> Subi
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Dear All,
>>>> >
>>>> > Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well 
>>>> >
>>>> > Best
>>>> > Igor
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Dear All,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>>>> >> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out previously.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy questions.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Suggestions pertaining to :
>>>> >> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum time for participation and interventions from the floor and non facilitators. 
>>>> >> 2. Format:
>>>> >> A-no moderator
>>>> >> B-4 moderators
>>>> >> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>>>> >> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience interventions only
>>>> >> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>>>> >> D. An open space
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>>>> >> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
>>>> >> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self nominations.  So we have them too.
>>>> >> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Any other inputs.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Regards
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Subi
>>>> >>
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> Igfmaglist mailing list
>>>> >> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>>>> >> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>>> >
>>>> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/5f93735f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Evolintgov2014 mailing list
Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Fri Aug  8 16:20:56 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 16:20:56 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <53E4A18B.2040400@acm.org>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E4A18B.2040400@acm.org>
Message-ID: <BAY406-EAS4271B24B822D3F359115DD3D3EE0@phx.gbl>

Avri, I just wanted to comment specifically on this point as I think that a lot of consideration has gone into how to include NETmundial as one input, but not to have IGF Istanbul be about any one important event or activity, that is to include the ideas that came out of NETmundial, alongside other key activities. 

From the Paris IGF consultation, there was agreement to have a Day 0 event organized and focusing on NETmundial output, and I see it listed and confirmed and a full day event. 

This session was designed to be broader and inclusive of much more than the output of NETmundial, but to take it into account, alongside WSIS +10, CSTD WSIS Review, ITU, UNESCO, ICANN, and, of course, the results of the Modalities consultation in UNGA, leading to the 6 month consultation and two day high level event in end of 2015. In short, a broad and highly dynamic landscape...

Undoubtedly during the second segment of the main session, reflections from participants of that earlier session will emerge. Also, it has been more or less usual to have Emerging Issues to also address improvements to the IGF, so the session on Day 3 is not solely about Improvements to the IGF but the Evolution of the Landscape. 

I think your suggestion though is being incorporated, but not with a shift in the title, as Subi noted. 

Marilyn Cade
Sent from my iPad

> On Aug 8, 2014, at 6:08 AM, "Avri Doria" <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Ah well if all has been decided and you have already given up the
> opportunity to work on improving the IGF based on NETMundial, that's too
> bad.  I had thought that this had been the purpose of this session.
> 
> Sad to see IGF walk away from yet another a chance to improve.
> 
> 
> avri
> 
> 
>> On 08-Aug-14 02:15, Subi Chaturvedi wrote:
>> Also Avri thank you for your inputs. Always helpful. But changing the
>> title to Evol Internet Governance Ecosystem - a response to Netmundial
>> for this main might not be feasible because it has speakers from WEF,
>> UNCSD, UNESCO, WSIS and other parallel IG processes as well. The second
>> part is about the role of IGF and Strengthening IGF so the new title now
>> will incorporate both these aspects.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

From cherkasov at un.org  Fri Aug  8 18:02:21 2014
From: cherkasov at un.org (Vyacheslav Cherkasov)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 18:02:21 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] The IGF Trust Fund - evaluation
In-Reply-To: <53d95060.67a8700a.0aa0.2e93@mx.google.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>	<53D91968.6020104@acm.org>,
	<CANRKRpLGEiNCZo7VWaH14J98zs3i_C9g-j2Yvk2F6zs6g2iSaA@mail.gmail.com>
	<53d95060.67a8700a.0aa0.2e93@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <OF74A48247.CA8D81F7-ON85257D2E.00786611-85257D2E.007910E3@un.org>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/a4b0ed11/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: TORs IGF Project Evaluator Final.docx
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 45176 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140808/a4b0ed11/attachment.obj>

From iza at anr.org  Fri Aug  8 23:27:47 2014
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2014 12:27:47 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Query: [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session -
 Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F7C@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
References: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F15@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
	<84632B3F-AB1C-4527-9179-28D648B357A7@gmail.com>
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F7C@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKhBrvB+d6kQ6aGVBdm1a9CZKJ87D3S-Crd-vB3yVy8MEg@mail.gmail.com>

Very sorry for this very late intervention.

Looking at the list of names below, I see very few people from Asia and
Pacific, especially East Asia, South East Asia and South Asia as well as
Pacific Islands.

I see no Chinese or Indian, considering the user population, it is better
to include them.


For Government, only Mohammed Al Qurashi (KSA) - from Saudi Arabia which is
more of Middle East than Asia Pacific.

I would suggest someone from any other Asian countries - say China, Hong
Kong, Korea, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia etc.
 Dr. Govind (India) - just hosted APrIGF in Delhi - will be very good.

Amongst Private Sector, Technical Community and Civil Society, I see
Zahid from Pakistan, Geoff Huston from Australia and Adam Peake (Japan/UK).
I am not opposing to any single individuals at all, but having them all
three
seem too Caucasian oriented, (sorry to bring this), no Oriental or Asian or
Pacific
people there.

We have good candidates here again, people like:

Edmon Chung (Hong Kong), Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore), Hong Xue (China),
Ram Mohan (India), Rajesh Chharia (India), Rajnesh D Singh, (Fiji), Hongbin
Chu, (China), Anja Kovacs (India) YJ Park (korea).

Again sorry for this belated response, but I hope some of the factors be
included.

I didn't put any Japanese as I don't want to make this a kind of selfish
intervention, but there are also good candidates from Japan ;-)

izumi

   rally leaving off MAG members for now):
>
> Government/IGO:
>
>    - Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>    - Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel
>    1?)
>    - Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>
>
>    - Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>    - Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>    - Larry Strickling (US)
>    - Ed Vaizy (UK)
>    - Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>    - Alice Munyua (AU)
>
> Private Sector:
>
>    - Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>    - Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>    - Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>    - Phil Rushton (BT)
>    - Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>
> Technical Community:
>
>    - Jari Arkko (IETF)
>    - Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>    - Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>    - Byron Holland (CIRA)
>    - Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>    - Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>
> Civil Society:
>
>    - Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>    - Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>    - Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>    - Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>    - Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>    - Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>    - Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>    - Adam Peake (Glocom)
>
>

2014-08-08 22:42 GMT+09:00 Bhatia, Virat <virat.bhatia at intl.att.com>:

> Hi Bill,
>
> From everything you have mentioned, we are in complete agreement.
>
> Let me explain.
>
> *MAG members on main session*
>
> (i)      My comments are purely aimed at responding to the questions
> raised by Subi in her email ?regarding serving MAG members as panelists on
> a main session? to which Jeanette provided a response, and Subi
> acknowledged, seeking comments to ?refresh memory?.  I guess she is trying
> to decide on whether or not MAG members can accept a speaking / moderator
> roles on the main session she is helping to organize.
>
>
>
> (ii)    On the issue of main sessions, Janis, you, I and I believe
> everyone, agreed to keep the limit to 1 for 2014 IGF, based on his email of
> July 24, which you have quoted below. There is no quarrel on that issue. In
> fact your email quoting Janis reinforces my point and gives clear guidance
> for the organizers of main sessions.
>
>
>
> *MAG members on workshops*
>
> I have neither mentioned in my email,  nor wish by any means, to recommend
> that MAG members, who have accepted speaker roles for 3-4 or in some cases,
> even 5 workshops, should decline at this stage.  That would be terrible for
> the organizers of those workshops.  My point was limited to responding to
> the query about MAG members on main sessions only.
>
>  The fact that I am on 2 workshops is only self-disclosure.  It is by no
> means an imposition on others, since their commitments, in any event, were
> made much before Janis?s email to workshop organizers, and must be honored.
> Like you, I don?t see Janis?s email of ?1/3 max? as a hard and fast, where
> MAG members on workshops are concerned.
>
> I hope this settles the issue for all organizers and MAG members unless
> anyone has a different interpretation from what has been agreed here.
>
> Regards
>
> Virat Bhatia
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140809/ef66175a/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Sat Aug  9 01:55:17 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2014 11:25:17 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Query: IGF Main Session -
 Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKhBrvB+d6kQ6aGVBdm1a9CZKJ87D3S-Crd-vB3yVy8MEg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F15@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
	<84632B3F-AB1C-4527-9179-28D648B357A7@gmail.com>
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F7C@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
	<CA+YNoKhBrvB+d6kQ6aGVBdm1a9CZKJ87D3S-Crd-vB3yVy8MEg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpJVeEFQyko77y5YGC5VkNVKqtFhLQfhagayb0A2vRZthg@mail.gmail.com>

Izumi better late than never :) Though the list has been updated. But you
have made some excellent suggestions here.

Have responded inline below.

On 9 August 2014 08:57, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org> wrote:

> Very sorry for this very late intervention.
>
> Looking at the list of names below, I see very few people from Asia and
> Pacific, especially East Asia, South East Asia and South Asia as well as
> Pacific Islands.
>
> I see no Chinese or Indian, considering the user population, it is better
> to include them.
>
>
> For Government, only Mohammed Al Qurashi (KSA) - from Saudi Arabia which is
> more of Middle East than Asia Pacific.
>
> I would suggest someone from any other Asian countries - say China, Hong
> Kong, Korea, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia etc.
>  Dr. Govind (India) - just hosted APrIGF in Delhi - will be very good.:
>

Dr. Govind has been invited. In both his capacities as the organiser of
APrIGF , the CEO of NIXI and following up on Anriette suggestion of
including some host country government reps. India hosted the IGF in 2008
in Hyderabad and Dr. Govind was the nodal officer for it. We have also been
provided a Chair and a speaker for this session from the host country. It
would be good to have two minute interventions from the some of the other
host countries as well. Indonesia, Azerbaijan and others on the value that
IGF has created for and in the host countries, inline with Janis's larger
call.

>
> Amongst Private Sector, Technical Community and Civil Society, I see
> Zahid from Pakistan, Geoff Huston from Australia and Adam Peake (Japan/UK).
>

Bill had suggested Jeremy or Adam Peake from CS. Jeremy has responded in
the affirmative Adam is yet to respond.


> I am not opposing to any single individuals at all, but having them all
> three
> seem too Caucasian oriented, (sorry to bring this), no Oriental or Asian
> or Pacific
> people there.
>
> We have good candidates here again, people like:
>
> Edmon Chung (Hong Kong), Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore), Hong Xue (China),
> Ram Mohan (India), Rajesh Chharia (India), Rajnesh D Singh, (Fiji),
> Hongbin Chu, (China), Anja Kovacs (India) YJ Park (korea).
>

We have some good names from CS now.

I did ask around for the Japanese team which made an excellent presentation
at the WGEC meeting in which they did a comprehensive 8 year evaluation of
IGF. They would make for an excellent intervention in this session. Would
be grateful if you can connect us with them.

We want the panel to be balanced, relevant and diverse.

Also a connect with Prof. Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore) would also be great.

We're trying to not repeat people from the same networks and organisations.

Thanks again for your input. Sending the updated draft shortly. An early
response from you would be much appreciated.

Regards

Subi



>
> Again sorry for this belated response, but I hope some of the factors be
> included.
>
> I didn't put any Japanese as I don't want to make this a kind of selfish
> intervention, but there are also good candidates from Japan ;-)
>
> izumi
>
>    rally leaving off MAG members for now):
>>
>> Government/IGO:
>>
>>    - Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>>    - Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel
>>    1?)
>>    - Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>>
>>
>>    - Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>>    - Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>>    - Larry Strickling (US)
>>    - Ed Vaizy (UK)
>>    - Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>>    - Alice Munyua (AU)
>>
>> Private Sector:
>>
>>    - Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>>    - Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>>    - Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>>    - Phil Rushton (BT)
>>    - Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
>>
>> Technical Community:
>>
>>    - Jari Arkko (IETF)
>>    - Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>>    - Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>>    - Byron Holland (CIRA)
>>    - Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>>    - Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>>
>> Civil Society:
>>
>>    - Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>>    - Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>>    - Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>>    - Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>>    - Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>>    - Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>>    - Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>>    - Adam Peake (Glocom)
>>
>>
>
> 2014-08-08 22:42 GMT+09:00 Bhatia, Virat <virat.bhatia at intl.att.com>:
>
>> Hi Bill,
>>
>> From everything you have mentioned, we are in complete agreement.
>>
>> Let me explain.
>>
>> *MAG members on main session*
>>
>> (i)      My comments are purely aimed at responding to the questions
>> raised by Subi in her email ?regarding serving MAG members as panelists on
>> a main session? to which Jeanette provided a response, and Subi
>> acknowledged, seeking comments to ?refresh memory?.  I guess she is trying
>> to decide on whether or not MAG members can accept a speaking / moderator
>> roles on the main session she is helping to organize.
>>
>>
>>
>> (ii)    On the issue of main sessions, Janis, you, I and I believe
>> everyone, agreed to keep the limit to 1 for 2014 IGF, based on his email of
>> July 24, which you have quoted below. There is no quarrel on that issue. In
>> fact your email quoting Janis reinforces my point and gives clear guidance
>> for the organizers of main sessions.
>>
>>
>>
>> *MAG members on workshops*
>>
>> I have neither mentioned in my email,  nor wish by any means, to
>> recommend that MAG members, who have accepted speaker roles for 3-4 or in
>> some cases, even 5 workshops, should decline at this stage.  That would be
>> terrible for the organizers of those workshops.  My point was limited to
>> responding to the query about MAG members on main sessions only.
>>
>>  The fact that I am on 2 workshops is only self-disclosure.  It is by no
>> means an imposition on others, since their commitments, in any event, were
>> made much before Janis?s email to workshop organizers, and must be honored.
>> Like you, I don?t see Janis?s email of ?1/3 max? as a hard and fast, where
>> MAG members on workshops are concerned.
>>
>> I hope this settles the issue for all organizers and MAG members unless
>> anyone has a different interpretation from what has been agreed here.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Virat Bhatia
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140809/765943b4/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Sat Aug  9 02:03:04 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2014 11:33:04 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] The IGF Trust Fund - evaluation
In-Reply-To: <OF74A48247.CA8D81F7-ON85257D2E.00786611-85257D2E.007910E3@un.org>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<53D91968.6020104@acm.org>
	<CANRKRpLGEiNCZo7VWaH14J98zs3i_C9g-j2Yvk2F6zs6g2iSaA@mail.gmail.com>
	<53d95060.67a8700a.0aa0.2e93@mx.google.com>
	<OF74A48247.CA8D81F7-ON85257D2E.00786611-85257D2E.007910E3@un.org>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpKbL+ahS4XHb7ffexvyLHOajk21d1ZyAKvwtHuPBg3_kg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Slava,

Many thanks for sharing this note. We were indeed confused about the scope
and terms.

Could you please let us know if all MAG members would be consulted?

And what is the appropriate channel for providing inputs.

regards

Subi



On 9 August 2014 03:32, Vyacheslav Cherkasov <cherkasov at un.org> wrote:

> *Dear MAG Members, *
>
> *We would like to inform you that in accordance with UN rules and
> regulations, DPADM has recruited a Consultant to evaluate the IGF project.
> Kindly note that the evaluation is required under the terms of the project.
> As is typical for evaluations of its kind, it is timed to take place
> approximately a year before the expiration of the IGF's current mandate. *
>
> *To clarify, the role of the Consultant is to provide an external
> evaluation of the impacts of the IGF project to date and the likelihood of
> future impacts, as well as assess the project's performance, implementation
> and actual results. Details on the Project Evaluator's duties, expected
> outputs and duration of engagement can be found in the attached Terms of
> Reference (TOR). *
>
> *After advertising the TOR on the IGF website and conducting a thorough
> review of candidates, DPADM selected Mr. Edward Roche as IGF Project
> Evaluator. Mr. Roche is an expert advisor on Internet governance, national
> ICT planning and use of ICTs in multinational enterprises, international
> organizations and NGOs. He has worked in an expert advisory capacity the
> field of information technology for more than thirty-five years.*
>
> *We understand Mr. Roche has already begun contacting some of you. Should
> you have further inquiries on his planned activities or the scope of the
> evaluation, feel free to contact Mr. Vyacheslav Cherkasov, Sr. Governance
> and Public Administration Officer in DPADM/UNDESA, at cherkasov at un.org
> <cherkasov at un.org>.*
>
> *Thank you in advance for your cooperation.*
>
> *Best, vyacheslav (slava) cherkasov, senior governance and public
> administration officer, dpadm/desa*
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140809/d2bf953f/attachment.htm>

From karklinsj at gmail.com  Sat Aug  9 04:09:05 2014
From: karklinsj at gmail.com (karklinsj at gmail.com)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2014 08:09:05 +0000
Subject: [Evolintgov2014]
 =?utf-8?q?=5BIGFmaglist=5D__IGF_Main_Session_-_E?=
 =?utf-8?q?volution_of_IG_Ecosystem-Update?=
In-Reply-To: <3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440EF1@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
References: <8gwtpfkqvg1hlxrcnv1l0vs0.1407495049574@email.android.com>,
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440EF1@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
Message-ID: <6ae1f6b298fa4b4dbdd57bb19282a5cf@gmail.com>

Dear MAG colleagues,




Thank you for your tremendous forts in pulling main sessions together and making them interesting and useful for everybody.

The methodology which has been chosen in the early stages (decentralized, community driven) inevitably lead to some duplication in inviting speakers. As we see all organizers reach out to th most prominent representatives of  stakeholder groups and it is natural.

In February we discussed that the MAG members should exercise self-restraint in proposing workshops and participating in the sessions. This understanding should not be interpreted as a blanket ban but rather invitation. If all other options turn to be unfeasible the MAG members may be called for a rescue. All MAG members are experts in their respective fields with big experience in IG issues undoubtedly.

Fiona?s proposal to prepare Main session organization guidelines for the next round sounds good to me as every edition of IGF has provided some lessons that may be documented for the future. I do not expect guidelines revolutionize the process but rather serve as a reference point that all facilitators use the same set of principles.

We can discuss these ideas further during the conference call that is step for 19 August noon UTC.

Best regards

JK






Sent from Surface





From: 'Bhatia, Virat'
Sent: ?Friday?, ?August? ?8?, ?2014 ?2?:?43? ?PM
To: Fiona Alexander, Subi Chaturvedi
Cc: igfmaglist at intgovforum.org, evolintgov2014






Dear MAG Members,

With regards to duplication of names, this is essentially occurring for 2 reasons:

(i)      First when organizers inadvertently invite the same people on their session without knowing that the same person may have been invited elsewhere. (No one?s fault.)

(ii)    When those who refer / volunteer names send the same name to multiple organizers. We had one such situation with another main session but that has now been resolved amicably.

For ease of reference, I am including the list of speakers for the main session on ?Policies Enabling Access, Growth and Development? to be held on Day 2 morning.  Hopefully this will help avoid duplications for other session to the extent possible.  There may be a couple of additions from the civil society side but we are trying to get a new voice, possibly from Ecuador, or Kenya or Brazil. 

The question is, whether there can be a ?hard and fast? regarding ?one main session only? for speakers, beyond the self-imposed limit for MAG members on themselves?   If yes, we need a process for better information sharing, since organizers can easily be blindsided by 5 lists running simultaneously and several cross emails. Something to think about for 2015 process improvements.

To bring a swift closure to the remaining main sessions ? ( 3 week left), one request for those who are now contributing names to the list. When sending references, please send details about stakeholder group, country / regions of residence / work and email ID.  Further, if at all possible, please pre-check their availability before sending their reference.  This would be tremendously helpful in locking down speakers, especially new voices. 

 At times organizers spend days getting hold of contacts / email IDs (due to time difference), and then many days awaiting a response from proposed speakers, who have no idea that their names have been volunteered by someone else. 

So in summary:

(i)      Please fell feel to refer to the Access / Development speaker list provided below (to avoid duplication);  and, 

(ii)    Please send in full details of all speakers, preferably after checking their availability and interest (given the acute shortage of time in the run-up to IGF).    

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(i)          International Organizations

?        Mr. Getachew Engida,  Deputy Director General, UNESCO

?        Mr. Tomas Lamanauskas, Head,  Corporate Strategy Division, ITU

(ii)          Government:

?        Dr. Hoda Baraka,  Advisor to the Minister of ICT,  Govt. of Qatar

?        Dr. Norberto Berner, Secretary of Communications, Govt.  of Argentina

?        Ambassador Daniel A. Sepulveda, Dy. Assistant Secretary of State & U.S. Coordinator for Int?l Communications, United States Govt. 

?        Ms. Omobola Johnson,  Minister of Communications Technology, Govt. of Nigeria 

?        Ms. Neelie Kroes,  European Commissioner for Digital Agenda, European Union 

?        Mr. Jackson Miake,  Office of the Govt. CIO ? Prime Minister's Office, Govt. of the Republic of Vanuatu

?        Ms. Salam Yamout,  National ICT Strategy Coordinator, Presidency of the Council of Ministers, Govt. of Lebanon

(iii)           Civil Society

?        Dr. (Ms) Alison Gillwald,   Research ICT Africa, South Africa

?        Mr. Guo Liang,  Director & Associate Professor, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, China

?        Mr. Henri Malosse, President of the European Economic and Social Committee, EU 

?        Ms. Joana Varon, Center for Technology & Society / Funda??o Get?lio Vargas, Brazil

(iv)          Technical Community

?        Ms. Kathryn Brown,   CEO, ISOC,

?        Mr. Mike Jensen,  Internet Access Specialist, Brazil APC, Brazil

?        Professor David Reed,  University of Colorado, USA

?        Mr. Rohan Samarajiva,  Chair, LIRNEasia, Sri Lanka

(v)          Private Sector

?        Mr. Hossam El-Gamal,  Board Member and Treasurer, AFICTA, Egypt

?        Mr. Rajan Mathews,  Director General, Cellular Operators Association of India, India

?        Ms.  Funke Opeke,  CEO Main One Ltd., Lagos, Nigeria

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Trust this is helpful, 

 

Regards,

Virat Bhatia

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



From: Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Fiona Alexander
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 4:21 PM
To: Subi Chaturvedi
Cc: MAG-public; evolintgov2014
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

 

I will check back with my USG colleagues but what is the difference between being on the panel and an intervention? 


 


As a general matter,  at some point the MAG will need to look across the package of main sessions to ensure diversity of speakers.   Seems to be a lot of familiar names, multiple times.  Not for now, but perhaps the next cycle the MAG should consider developing main session guidelines.

 


-------- Original message --------


From: Subi Chaturvedi 


Date:08/08/2014 6:39 AM (GMT-05:00) 


To: Fiona Alexander 


Cc: evolintgov2014 , MAG-public , Marilyn Cade 


Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update 


 



Fiona I was  informed by Marilyn after consultation with Andrew from the state department that Ambassador Sepulveda will be making an intervention from USG. He's been coordinating this with Marilyn. 


 


Would you recommend two speakers? Larry makes perfect sense in the first half about evolution of the Internet Ecosystem on the IANA transition. If the others are in agreement than your help in approaching him would be very welcome. 


 


Regards


 


Subi








 

 


On 7 August 2014 16:24, Fiona Alexander <FAlexander at ntia.doc.gov> wrote:


I too am a bit lost but note that Larry Strickling is listed as a possible speaker.   Tony knowledge NTIA has not been contacted regarding this request.  If there is a desire to have a US Government speaker please let me know ASAP and we can find one. 



 


-------- Original message --------


From: William Drake 


Date:08/07/2014 6:27 AM (GMT-05:00) 


To: evolintgov2014 


Cc: MAG-public 


Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update 


 


Hi 


 


I must admit I?m rather lost here, how are we proceeding with this session?   I?d previously compiled and sent a few times the list of all names people had suggested as possible speakers on the two panels.  The last version was sent to the mail list on 25 July.  Since then there?s been no collective discussion about options and who might be optimal on which panel. There have been a references to bilateral private conversations, a few requests by MAG members for speaking slots for themselves or their colleagues (which is a bit awkward), and a few confirmations that people invited previously have agreed to participate.  I?m sorry for being old fashioned but all previous main session planning groups I?ve participated in over the years worked in a more transparent and participatory way and got to consensus more quickly, so I just don?t know how to track this one?s progress.  It would be good if we could move this forward to a solid conclusion on a consensual basis.  We are behind schedule...


 


 


Session title: As suggested previously, "Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora? seems a bit awkward, we might want to lose the subtitle, unless we?re going to expanding it to cover everything happening in the wider environment, e.g. NM, NM Initiative, etc etc.


 


Descriptive text: what?s in the program paper seems dated.

 


Speakers/Moderators: [is the below still current?]


 


 



Panel 1: Evolution of the Internet Governance Ecosystem*


      [including per Janis the NM Initiative]



Moderator: TBD  



Panelists:

1. Fadi Chehade (ICANN)  [Confirmed (Bahar)]
2. Hamadoun Toure? (ITU)   [Invited, TBC]
3. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.)   [Confirmed (Subi)]



Panel 2: The Role of the IGF


 
1. Kathy Brown (ISOC)   [Confirmed (Constance)]
2. Vint Cerf (Google)  [Invited, TBC]


 


 


Moderator options suggested so far (leaving off MAG members for now): 

Jeanette Hofmann (CS) 
Sam Dickinson (TC)


 


Panelist options suggested so far (generally leaving off MAG members for now): 


 


Government/IGO:
Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel 1?)
Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
Norberto Berner (Argentina)
Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
Larry Strickling (US)
Ed Vaizy (UK)
Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
Alice Munyua (AU)



Private Sector:

Danil Kerimi (WEF)
Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
Phil Rushton (BT)
Jimson Olufuye (WITSA) 


Technical Community:

Jari Arkko (IETF)
Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
Byron Holland (CIRA)
Geoff Huston (APNIC)
Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)


Civil Society:

Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
Stephanie Perrin (UT)
Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
Marilia Maciel (FGV) 
Adam Peake (Glocom)


 


Does anyone have input on how we can complete the line-ups?


 


Bill


 



On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:






 


Thank you Igor. Will follow your lead.


 


regards


 


Subi




On 1 August 2014 13:51, Igor Ostrowski <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:


Subi, 


 


apologies for the delay.  Here is the info:


 


Minister of Administration and Digitalization, Poland

Doctor of political sciences, academic lecturer specializing in European affairs. From 2009, Member of European Parliament, where he dealt with the implementation of EU treaties and European Digital Agenda, including e-commerce and privacy issues. Since November 2013, Minister of Administration and Digitalization.  Thanks to his efforts, issues surrounding Internet governance and advocacy of the multistakeholder approach have been treated with top priority by the Polish government.  Active participation in the NetMundial conference and creation of IGF Polska are a few examples of his recent activities.


 


It's best to contact him thru the Head of his Cabinet:  Joanna.Popielawska at mac.gov.pl


 


Best

Igor 




 


 


On Jul 30, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:






Many thanks Igor.

Pls share a brief profile and email co-ordinates.

Collecting it for all the speakers.

Regards 

Subi



On 30 Jul 2014 15:40, "Igor Ostrowski" <igor at ostrowski.waw.pl> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Rafa? Traskowski - Gov Stakeholder Group (PL Minister of Administration and Digitization) hs confirmed his availability as well 
>
> Best
> Igor
>
>
> On Jul 30, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Two senior colleagues Mrs. Kroes (EU) -Stakeholder group-Gov.
>> And Milton Mueller(Academia/Civil Society) have confirmed their availability in addition to Ms. Kathy Brown *ISOC)-; Technical Community.
>>
>> Colleagueas on the MAG do please confirm if your organisation's participating. You've been copied on all mails which were sent out previously.
>>
>> There's a call scheduled between the two co-leads and Mathew and Markus have also provided inputs along with substantive inputs from Constance, Vlada, Bill, Paul, Olga, Ana and others. Not sure if Markus will be on the call today but we have a wide pool of options from accross stakeholder groups and some names for moderators to choose from.
>>
>> All of them have been metaculously documented across several emails.
>>
>> Your inputs have been most conducive.
>>
>> Today there will be discussion further on refining format and policy questions.
>>
>> Suggestions pertaining to :
>> 1. Exact nos. Of questions to be adressed, so that we keep maximum time for participation and interventions from the floor and non facilitators. 
>> 2. Format:
>> A-no moderator
>> B-4 moderators
>> C-deep well with identified interventions for 3 mins each and then abt 40 minute long interventions from different stakeholder groups for each of the two halves.  Total of 80 interventions.
>> D. A general chair some disucussants and then open mic with audience interventions only
>> E. A roundtable with concentric circles
>> D. An open space
>>
>> 3.Contact details of speakers recommended by you
>> (We hope to send out invites by the end of this week, since inputs have been received on session format the moratorium imposed on inviting speakers can I believe be lifted to give them enough notice to block their calenders)
>> (Olga I have your recommendations down) and some are self nominations.  So we have them too.
>> Need Patrick's, Bill's and Igor's.
>>
>> 4. Some Govt. And CS groups in particular are travelling with youth volunteers.  Can they join us too for the session? Would they like to nominate some? Participants from the Dynamic Coalition on core Internet values will have some.
>>
>> Any other inputs.
>>
>> If anybody else wishes to join the call, please feel free and contact Ms. Marilyn Cade to join in.
>>
>> We'll be updating the list soon.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Subi
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>

 


_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140809/73f2433a/attachment.htm>

From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Sat Aug  9 08:14:29 2014
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2014 21:14:29 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Query: IGF Main Session -
	Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpJVeEFQyko77y5YGC5VkNVKqtFhLQfhagayb0A2vRZthg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F15@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
	<84632B3F-AB1C-4527-9179-28D648B357A7@gmail.com>
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F7C@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
	<CA+YNoKhBrvB+d6kQ6aGVBdm1a9CZKJ87D3S-Crd-vB3yVy8MEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpJVeEFQyko77y5YGC5VkNVKqtFhLQfhagayb0A2vRZthg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FB0D3110-8ADE-41A2-9CFE-CC15E8631D04@glocom.ac.jp>

Hi Subi, comment below:


On Aug 9, 2014, at 2:55 PM, Subi Chaturvedi wrote:

> Izumi better late than never :) Though the list has been updated. But you have made some excellent suggestions here. 
> 
> Have responded inline below.
> 
> On 9 August 2014 08:57, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org> wrote:
> Very sorry for this very late intervention.
> 
> Looking at the list of names below, I see very few people from Asia and Pacific, especially East Asia, South East Asia and South Asia as well as Pacific Islands.
> 
> I see no Chinese or Indian, considering the user population, it is better to include them.
> 
> 
> For Government, only Mohammed Al Qurashi (KSA) - from Saudi Arabia which is
> more of Middle East than Asia Pacific.
> 
> I would suggest someone from any other Asian countries - say China, Hong Kong, Korea, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia etc.
>  Dr. Govind (India) - just hosted APrIGF in Delhi - will be very good.:
> 
> Dr. Govind has been invited. In both his capacities as the organiser of APrIGF , the CEO of NIXI and following up on Anriette suggestion of including some host country government reps. India hosted the IGF in 2008 in Hyderabad and Dr. Govind was the nodal officer for it. We have also been provided a Chair and a speaker for this session from the host country. It would be good to have two minute interventions from the some of the other host countries as well. Indonesia, Azerbaijan and others on the value that IGF has created for and in the host countries, inline with Janis's larger call.
> 
> Amongst Private Sector, Technical Community and Civil Society, I see
> Zahid from Pakistan, Geoff Huston from Australia and Adam Peake (Japan/UK).
> 
> Bill had suggested Jeremy or Adam Peake from CS. Jeremy has responded in the affirmative Adam is yet to respond.
>  


I've replied a couple of times, 

On Jul 23, 2014, at 4:55 PM, Adam wrote:

> Is there a current outline of the session and topics to be discussed.  Looked through the list archives and nothing stood out <http://mail.intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/>
> 
> If there is a NETmundial focus then I'd be happy to contribute. 
> 
> Adam
> 


and yesterday:


On Aug 8, 2014, at 6:39 PM, Adam wrote:

> Thanks Bill.
> 
> I'd be happy to help out, contribute if I can -- have some idea of WSIS/IGF/NETmundial.
> 
> But person I'd personally like to hear from is Marilaia Maciel.  She's been following most of the relevant activities, and very involved in coordinating the roadmap section of the NETmundial document (I spent more time on principles.)  I think there's been some misunderstanding about NETmundial's suggestions regarding the IGF, and she may put those straight. 
> 
> Adam
> 
> 



 
Adam




> I am not opposing to any single individuals at all, but having them all three
> seem too Caucasian oriented, (sorry to bring this), no Oriental or Asian or Pacific
> people there.
> 
> We have good candidates here again, people like:
> 
> Edmon Chung (Hong Kong), Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore), Hong Xue (China), 
> Ram Mohan (India), Rajesh Chharia (India), Rajnesh D Singh, (Fiji), Hongbin Chu, (China), Anja Kovacs (India) YJ Park (korea).
> 
> We have some good names from CS now. 
> 
> I did ask around for the Japanese team which made an excellent presentation at the WGEC meeting in which they did a comprehensive 8 year evaluation of IGF. They would make for an excellent intervention in this session. Would be grateful if you can connect us with them.
> 
> We want the panel to be balanced, relevant and diverse. 
> 
> Also a connect with Prof. Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore) would also be great. 
> 
> We're trying to not repeat people from the same networks and organisations.
> 
> Thanks again for your input. Sending the updated draft shortly. An early response from you would be much appreciated.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Subi
> 
>  
> 
> Again sorry for this belated response, but I hope some of the factors be included.
> 
> I didn't put any Japanese as I don't want to make this a kind of selfish intervention, but there are also good candidates from Japan ;-)
> 
> izumi
> 
>> rally leaving off MAG members for now): 
>> 
>> Government/IGO:
>> 	? Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
>> 	? Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for panel 1?)
>> 	? Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
>> 	? Norberto Berner (Argentina)
>> 	? Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
>> 	? Larry Strickling (US)
>> 	? Ed Vaizy (UK)
>> 	? Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
>> 	? Alice Munyua (AU)
>> Private Sector:
>> 	? Danil Kerimi (WEF)
>> 	? Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
>> 	? Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
>> 	? Phil Rushton (BT)
>> 	? Jimson Olufuye (WITSA) 
>> Technical Community:
>> 	? Jari Arkko (IETF)
>> 	? Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
>> 	? Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
>> 	? Byron Holland (CIRA)
>> 	? Geoff Huston (APNIC)
>> 	? Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
>> Civil Society:
>> 	? Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
>> 	? Stephanie Perrin (UT)
>> 	? Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
>> 	? Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
>> 	? Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
>> 	? Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
>> 	? Marilia Maciel (FGV)
>> 	? Adam Peake (Glocom)
> 
> 
> 2014-08-08 22:42 GMT+09:00 Bhatia, Virat <virat.bhatia at intl.att.com>:
> Hi Bill,
> 
> From everything you have mentioned, we are in complete agreement.
> 
> Let me explain.
> 
> MAG members on main session
> 
> (i)      My comments are purely aimed at responding to the questions raised by Subi in her email ?regarding serving MAG members as panelists on a main session? to which Jeanette provided a response, and Subi acknowledged, seeking comments to ?refresh memory?.  I guess she is trying to decide on whether or not MAG members can accept a speaking / moderator roles on the main session she is helping to organize.
> 
>  
> 
> (ii)    On the issue of main sessions, Janis, you, I and I believe everyone, agreed to keep the limit to 1 for 2014 IGF, based on his email of July 24, which you have quoted below. There is no quarrel on that issue. In fact your email quoting Janis reinforces my point and gives clear guidance for the organizers of main sessions. 
> 
>  
> 
> MAG members on workshops
> 
> I have neither mentioned in my email,  nor wish by any means, to recommend that MAG members, who have accepted speaker roles for 3-4 or in some cases, even 5 workshops, should decline at this stage.  That would be terrible for the organizers of those workshops.  My point was limited to responding to the query about MAG members on main sessions only. 
> 
>  The fact that I am on 2 workshops is only self-disclosure.  It is by no means an imposition on others, since their commitments, in any event, were made much before Janis?s email to workshop organizers, and must be honored. Like you, I don?t see Janis?s email of ?1/3 max? as a hard and fast, where MAG members on workshops are concerned.
> 
> I hope this settles the issue for all organizers and MAG members unless anyone has a different interpretation from what has been agreed here.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Virat Bhatia
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org




From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Sat Aug  9 13:04:34 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2014 13:04:34 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution
	of	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY406-EAS78026C72A506C0A55B90B2D3EF0@phx.gbl>



Sent from my iPad

> On Aug 8, 2014, at 4:22 AM, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Subi
> 
>> On Aug 8, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> This year as MAG members we then volunteered through a doodle poll for the mains on which we wished to contribute more actively than others.
>> 
>> Every session then had ranging from 1- 2 and sometimes 4 co-leads from amongst MAG members.
>> 
>> With about 16-18 volunteers per session.
>> 
>> Over several emails on the MAG list and individual calls and emails, inputs have been contributed. Every main has then gone on to organically synthesise these inputs. Some through a single mail and others through a series of continuous engagements. The water is being carried across different mains who have volunteered to coherently assimilate inputs received.
>> 
>> Once a call for inputs is put out regarding specific requests the co-leads generally wait within reason for specific inputs and specific threads and then for the purpose of delivery and operationalisation of actual logistical work  move the work along.
> 
> The problem here is what 'move the work along' means.  With respect to inviting panelists, the consistent, standard practice of the MAG over the past decade has been that the lead facilitators keep a running track of the list of suggested names (actually, I had to step in and do that here), pose choices to the group, people weigh in and the group reaches consensus, and then the facilitators reach out to speakers and keep the list continuously informed as to the status?who?s accepted or not, what decision might need to be made accordingly. No collective decision to change these long-standing transparent and inclusive procedures was taken.  But it seems that your model is that people provide input and then the two first moving facilitators go off and make the decisions, often informing the group only when pestered for answers.  This is really just not how it works, sorry.
> 
> There are a number of outstanding choices to be made in filling out the panels.  Suggestions have been made by participants.  Let?s please follow the long-standing practice in making decisions from here.
> 
> I reiterate for reference my suggestions of Jeanette and Samantha Dickinson as moderators, Larry Strickling (govt) and Geoff Huston (TC) for the ecosystem panel, and Jeremy Malcolm or Adam Peake (CS) for the IGF panel.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140809/3fe47ae5/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Evolintgov2014 mailing list
Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Sat Aug  9 13:10:06 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2014 13:10:06 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution
	of	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY406-EAS41642B63EE55F79099EC234D3EF0@phx.gbl>

Bill, as the co organizer with Subi, I appreciate your input.

Actually, I think that Subi and I have a widely representative approach.

Let us present our draft as co-organizers;

Your input and others have been listened to.

For now, we will not be sending individual responses, but working on a document that is representative of all the inputs, which are rather numerous, and not just from those of the community that are experienced,but also new voices, as this is indeed one important, but not the only important session.

I understand you are publishing an e-book and that is on Day 0. As you can share details about that event, I am sure that many of us will want to attend that session. It is of course, Day 0 but already a busy day!

Sent from my iPad

> On Aug 8, 2014, at 4:22 AM, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Subi
> 
>> On Aug 8, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> This year as MAG members we then volunteered through a doodle poll for the mains on which we wished to contribute more actively than others.
>> 
>> Every session then had ranging from 1- 2 and sometimes 4 co-leads from amongst MAG members.
>> 
>> With about 16-18 volunteers per session.
>> 
>> Over several emails on the MAG list and individual calls and emails, inputs have been contributed. Every main has then gone on to organically synthesise these inputs. Some through a single mail and others through a series of continuous engagements. The water is being carried across different mains who have volunteered to coherently assimilate inputs received.
>> 
>> Once a call for inputs is put out regarding specific requests the co-leads generally wait within reason for specific inputs and specific threads and then for the purpose of delivery and operationalisation of actual logistical work  move the work along.
> 
> The problem here is what 'move the work along' means.  With respect to inviting panelists, the consistent, standard practice of the MAG over the past decade has been that the lead facilitators keep a running track of the list of suggested names (actually, I had to step in and do that here), pose choices to the group, people weigh in and the group reaches consensus, and then the facilitators reach out to speakers and keep the list continuously informed as to the status?who?s accepted or not, what decision might need to be made accordingly. No collective decision to change these long-standing transparent and inclusive procedures was taken.  But it seems that your model is that people provide input and then the two first moving facilitators go off and make the decisions, often informing the group only when pestered for answers.  This is really just not how it works, sorry.
> 
> There are a number of outstanding choices to be made in filling out the panels.  Suggestions have been made by participants.  Let?s please follow the long-standing practice in making decisions from here.
> 
> I reiterate for reference my suggestions of Jeanette and Samantha Dickinson as moderators, Larry Strickling (govt) and Geoff Huston (TC) for the ecosystem panel, and Jeremy Malcolm or Adam Peake (CS) for the IGF panel.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140809/227f8727/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Evolintgov2014 mailing list
Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

From iza at anr.org  Sat Aug  9 18:45:57 2014
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 07:45:57 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <BAY406-EAS41642B63EE55F79099EC234D3EF0@phx.gbl>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS41642B63EE55F79099EC234D3EF0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKg5XRxdpG2NooEjVPjOaGWa5Ny5MhtLtacDQc9-UBViEg@mail.gmail.com>

2014-08-10 2:10 GMT+09:00 Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>:

> Bill, as the co organizer with Subi, I appreciate your input.
>
> Actually, I think that Subi and I have a widely representative approach.
>
> Let us present our draft as co-organizers;
>
> Your input and others have been listened to.
>

Where is the latest draft?  Could you put it to some shareable space such
as EtherPad or Google Doc or something like that?  That makes our life much
easier to keep updated.

izumi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/64251e2f/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Sun Aug 10 00:11:22 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 09:41:22 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution of
	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKg5XRxdpG2NooEjVPjOaGWa5Ny5MhtLtacDQc9-UBViEg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS41642B63EE55F79099EC234D3EF0@phx.gbl>
	<CA+YNoKg5XRxdpG2NooEjVPjOaGWa5Ny5MhtLtacDQc9-UBViEg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANRKRp+kvq2CgRnG29ahKAp+pXhMbQAf2+6j1L-0hzt56YsDPQ@mail.gmail.com>

The draft is indeed ready Izumi. And I thank you yet again for all the
inputs you have provided to get us here.

Just awaiting a final read from the co-leads. Will be sharing it anytime
now.

Thank you all for your inputs and suggestions.

Regards

Subi

On 10 Aug 2014 04:16, "Izumi AIZU" <iza at anr.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 2014-08-10 2:10 GMT+09:00 Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>:
>
>> Bill, as the co organizer with Subi, I appreciate your input.
>>
>> Actually, I think that Subi and I have a widely representative approach.
>>
>> Let us present our draft as co-organizers;
>>
>> Your input and others have been listened to.
>
>
> Where is the latest draft?  Could you put it to some shareable space such
> as EtherPad or Google Doc or something like that?  That makes our life
much
> easier to keep updated.
>
> izumi
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/2bcaa7be/attachment.htm>

From wjdrake at gmail.com  Sun Aug 10 06:12:45 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 12:12:45 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] IGF Main Session - Evolution
	of	IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <BAY406-EAS41642B63EE55F79099EC234D3EF0@phx.gbl>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS41642B63EE55F79099EC234D3EF0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <3D58F281-83FA-4ABC-9890-BF939D3DDF94@gmail.com>

Hi Marilyn

Thanks for your messages.

On Aug 9, 2014, at 7:10 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Bill, as the co organizer with Subi, I appreciate your input.
> 
> Actually, I think that Subi and I have a widely representative approach.

Sure, I know you?re taking on board inputs.  The process point I was raising concerned what happens next: it?s one thing to do this

>> With respect to inviting panelists, the consistent, standard practice of the MAG over the past decade has been that the lead facilitators keep a running track of the list of suggested names (actually, I had to step in and do that here), pose choices to the group, people weigh in and the group reaches consensus, and then the facilitators reach out to speakers and keep the list continuously informed as to the status?who?s accepted or not, what decision might need to be made accordingly. No collective decision to change these long-standing transparent and inclusive procedures was taken.  

And another to do this

>> But it seems that your model is that people provide input and then the two first moving facilitators go off and make the decisions, often informing the group only when pestered for answers.  

So, e.g., we?re 3 weeks out and nobody else knows who?s been invited/confirmed, and we?re not doing the selections on list, which is why Izumi just asked,

> Where is the latest draft?  Could you put it to some shareable space such
> as EtherPad or Google Doc or something like that?  That makes our life much
> easier to keep updated.

Anyway, l'm sure it will all work out well and look forward to hearing more.

Cheers

Bill




From wjdrake at gmail.com  Sun Aug 10 06:17:19 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 12:17:19 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Day Zero e-'book' release on the NETmundial roadmap
Message-ID: <B4A80103-F20B-461F-92D8-ADB7591FD194@gmail.com>

Hi

Marilyn asked me on the planning list for the ecosystem/IGF main session,

> I understand you are publishing an e-book and that is on Day 0. As you can share details about that event, I am sure that many of us will want to attend that session. It is of course, Day 0 but already a busy day!

I was going to answer there but it might be that some others on the current and past MAGs would be interested, so: Yes, there?s a full-day event, the planning of which is still underway http://sched.co/1r7K8s3.  At present, I think the Brazilians will do panels in the morning looking back at NETmundial and maybe forward a bit, there will be release of the e- ?book? (it?s really just a big PDF), and then maybe there'll some discussion sessions?all TBD.  As to the book, texts are still coming in and anything could happen, so I don?t know if this is precisely what the final product will look like, but the working table of contents is below.

Cheers

Bill

?????

Beyond NETmundial: The Roadmap for Institutional Improvements to the Global Internet Governance Ecosystem

William J. Drake and Monroe Price, editors


Introduction 
Monroe Price  (U. Pennsylvania)
 
I.  Overviews

1. Evolving the Ecosystem
William Drake  (U. Zurich)

2. The NETmundial: An Innovative First Step on a Long Road   
Joana Varon (Consultant,  Brazil)

II.  Strengthening the Internet Governance Forum   
 
3. A Perspective from the Technical Community 
Markus Kummer  (The Internet Society, Switzerland)
 
4. A Perspective from the Private Sector: Ensuring that Forum Follows Function
Vint Cerf, Patrick Ryan, Max Senges, and Rick Whitt  (Google)

5. A Perspective from Civil Society  
Jeremy Malcolm (Electronic Frontier Foundation, USA)

III.  Filling the Gaps

6.  Institutionalizing the Clearing House Function
William Drake (U. Zurich)  & Lea Kaspar (Global Partners Digital, UK)

7.  Global Mechanisms to Support National and Regional Multistakeholderism
Anriette Esterhuysen  (Association for Progressive Communications, South Africa)

8.  Feet on the Ground: Marco Civil as an Example of Multistakeholderism in Practice 
Ronaldo Lemos  (Institute for Technology and Society, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil)  

9.  Journeys Can be More important than the Destination: 
Reflecting on the CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation  
Samantha Dickinson  (Consultant, Australia)

IV.  Improving ICANN

10.  The IANA Transfer
Emma Llans?  and Matt Shears  (Center for Democracy and Technology, USA/UK)

11.  ICANN Globalization, Accountability, and Transparency  
Avri Doria  (Consultant, USA)

V.  Broader Analytical Perspectives

12.  Towards Information Interdependence 
James Losey  (Stockholm University, Sweden)  

13.  Towards Information Sovereignty  
Shawn Powers  (Georgia State University, USA)

VI.  Moving Forward

14.  Creating a Global Internet Public Policy Space: Is there a Way Forward?
Marilia Maciel  (Center for Technology and Society, Getulio Vargas Foundation,  Brazil)
 
15.  Stepping into the ?Beyond?
Nnenna Nwakanma  (The World Wide Web Foundation, C?te d'Ivoire)

16.  NetMundial: Watershed in Internet Policy Making?  
Wolfgang Kleinw?chter  (University of Aarhus/Germany)


***********************************************
William J. Drake
International Fellow & Lecturer
  Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
  University of Zurich, Switzerland
Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, 
  ICANN, www.ncuc.org
william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists),
  www.williamdrake.org
***********************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/a9fac662/attachment.htm>

From iza at anr.org  Sun Aug 10 06:53:04 2014
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 19:53:04 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG
	Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRp+kvq2CgRnG29ahKAp+pXhMbQAf2+6j1L-0hzt56YsDPQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS41642B63EE55F79099EC234D3EF0@phx.gbl>
	<CA+YNoKg5XRxdpG2NooEjVPjOaGWa5Ny5MhtLtacDQc9-UBViEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRp+kvq2CgRnG29ahKAp+pXhMbQAf2+6j1L-0hzt56YsDPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKgf2TqJY2SxWHB-xAp8-hrf1nW9+wGAjsKwJOxdvcE_vg@mail.gmail.com>

Whether it's "ready" or not show the draft now, please. I don't understand
why you need extra process before showing that.
Any secret? That itself is very much troublesome.

Izumi


2014?8?10?????Subi Chaturvedi<subichaturvedi at gmail.com>????????:

> The draft is indeed ready Izumi. And I thank you yet again for all the
> inputs you have provided to get us here.
>
> Just awaiting a final read from the co-leads. Will be sharing it anytime
> now.
>
> Thank you all for your inputs and suggestions.
>
> Regards
>
> Subi
>
> On 10 Aug 2014 04:16, "Izumi AIZU" <iza at anr.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','iza at anr.org');>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2014-08-10 2:10 GMT+09:00 Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','marilynscade at hotmail.com');>>:
> >
> >> Bill, as the co organizer with Subi, I appreciate your input.
> >>
> >> Actually, I think that Subi and I have a widely representative approach.
> >>
> >> Let us present our draft as co-organizers;
> >>
> >> Your input and others have been listened to.
> >
> >
> > Where is the latest draft?  Could you put it to some shareable space such
> > as EtherPad or Google Doc or something like that?  That makes our life
> much
> > easier to keep updated.
> >
> > izumi
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> > Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org');>
> >
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
> >
>


-- 
                     >> Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
Japan
www.anr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/c4b9184d/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Sun Aug 10 07:00:06 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 16:30:06 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG
	Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKgf2TqJY2SxWHB-xAp8-hrf1nW9+wGAjsKwJOxdvcE_vg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS41642B63EE55F79099EC234D3EF0@phx.gbl>
	<CA+YNoKg5XRxdpG2NooEjVPjOaGWa5Ny5MhtLtacDQc9-UBViEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRp+kvq2CgRnG29ahKAp+pXhMbQAf2+6j1L-0hzt56YsDPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+YNoKgf2TqJY2SxWHB-xAp8-hrf1nW9+wGAjsKwJOxdvcE_vg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANRKRp+Gq71E3er7=trspVe2jrb_gOZGdX83KC1KzUAZD3p3DA@mail.gmail.com>

It is no secret. Quite the contrary Izumi. It is a simply a reflections of
inputs from the MAG and the community. But as all different facilitators
have been coordinating between them for all the other main sessions,
 wanted to maintain the same format across all the mains.

Anyway the draft is online now.

Thanks again for your efforts and inputs.

regards

Subi



On 10 August 2014 16:23, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org> wrote:

> Whether it's "ready" or not show the draft now, please. I don't understand
> why you need extra process before showing that.
> Any secret? That itself is very much troublesome.
>
> Izumi
>
>
> 2014?8?10?????Subi Chaturvedi<subichaturvedi at gmail.com>????????:
>
> The draft is indeed ready Izumi. And I thank you yet again for all the
>> inputs you have provided to get us here.
>>
>> Just awaiting a final read from the co-leads. Will be sharing it anytime
>> now.
>>
>> Thank you all for your inputs and suggestions.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Subi
>>
>> On 10 Aug 2014 04:16, "Izumi AIZU" <iza at anr.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 2014-08-10 2:10 GMT+09:00 Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>:
>> >
>> >> Bill, as the co organizer with Subi, I appreciate your input.
>> >>
>> >> Actually, I think that Subi and I have a widely representative
>> approach.
>> >>
>> >> Let us present our draft as co-organizers;
>> >>
>> >> Your input and others have been listened to.
>> >
>> >
>> > Where is the latest draft?  Could you put it to some shareable space
>> such
>> > as EtherPad or Google Doc or something like that?  That makes our life
>> much
>> > easier to keep updated.
>> >
>> > izumi
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> > Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> >
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>> >
>>
>
>
> --
>                      >> Izumi Aizu <<
> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
> Japan
> www.anr.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/d3634f35/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Sun Aug 10 07:25:11 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 16:55:11 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG
	Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRp+Gq71E3er7=trspVe2jrb_gOZGdX83KC1KzUAZD3p3DA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS41642B63EE55F79099EC234D3EF0@phx.gbl>
	<CA+YNoKg5XRxdpG2NooEjVPjOaGWa5Ny5MhtLtacDQc9-UBViEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRp+kvq2CgRnG29ahKAp+pXhMbQAf2+6j1L-0hzt56YsDPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+YNoKgf2TqJY2SxWHB-xAp8-hrf1nW9+wGAjsKwJOxdvcE_vg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRp+Gq71E3er7=trspVe2jrb_gOZGdX83KC1KzUAZD3p3DA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpKcLctdiK6aMm7rF07E5=XPL4jGmBV8xyeoLGu2A5AKrw@mail.gmail.com>

Could you confirm if you have received it Izumi.

Tried posting it multiple times. I have received a note which says that the
message is awaiting the approval of the moderator of the list before being
posted due to the mail box size limit.

Would be grateful if you could confirm whether it has indeed gone through,

warmest

Subi
----

On 10 August 2014 16:30, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:

> It is no secret. Quite the contrary Izumi. It is a simply a reflections of
> inputs from the MAG and the community. But as all different facilitators
> have been coordinating between them for all the other main sessions,
>  wanted to maintain the same format across all the mains.
>
> Anyway the draft is online now.
>
> Thanks again for your efforts and inputs.
>
> regards
>
> Subi
>
>
>
> On 10 August 2014 16:23, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org> wrote:
>
>> Whether it's "ready" or not show the draft now, please. I don't
>> understand why you need extra process before showing that.
>> Any secret? That itself is very much troublesome.
>>
>> Izumi
>>
>>
>> 2014?8?10?????Subi Chaturvedi<subichaturvedi at gmail.com>????????:
>>
>> The draft is indeed ready Izumi. And I thank you yet again for all the
>>> inputs you have provided to get us here.
>>>
>>> Just awaiting a final read from the co-leads. Will be sharing it anytime
>>> now.
>>>
>>> Thank you all for your inputs and suggestions.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Subi
>>>
>>> On 10 Aug 2014 04:16, "Izumi AIZU" <iza at anr.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2014-08-10 2:10 GMT+09:00 Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>:
>>> >
>>> >> Bill, as the co organizer with Subi, I appreciate your input.
>>> >>
>>> >> Actually, I think that Subi and I have a widely representative
>>> approach.
>>> >>
>>> >> Let us present our draft as co-organizers;
>>> >>
>>> >> Your input and others have been listened to.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Where is the latest draft?  Could you put it to some shareable space
>>> such
>>> > as EtherPad or Google Doc or something like that?  That makes our life
>>> much
>>> > easier to keep updated.
>>> >
>>> > izumi
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>> > Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>> >
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>                      >> Izumi Aizu <<
>> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
>> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
>> Japan
>> www.anr.org
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/64953b27/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Sun Aug 10 07:20:13 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 16:50:13 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of Internet
 Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS,
 ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
Message-ID: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are delighted
to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th September, 2014.

We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members and
active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and made
this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
1. Olga Cavalli
2.Anriette Esterhuyser
3.Subi Chaturvedi
4.Virat Bhatia
5.Ana Neves
6.Constance Bommelaer
7.Kossi Amessinou
8.Baher Esmat
9.Izumi Aizu
10.Shahram Soboutipour
11.William Drake
12.Jivan
13.Patrick Ryan
14.Ankhi Das
15.Christine Arida
16. Filiz
17. Paul Wilson
18. Mathew Shears
19. Jeanette Hoffman
20 Adam Peake
21. Markus Kummer

We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has indeed
benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy and
freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts have
been made to include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy
questions.

We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively
engage with us.

A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching this
session in particular through a sustained engagement.

Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and
insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained committed
to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some of them will
lend us their considerable skills at the venue for substantive
rapporteuring.



warmest

Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/1058db33/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 476160 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/1058db33/attachment.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 502524 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/1058db33/attachment.pdf>

From baher.esmat at icann.org  Sun Aug 10 08:05:24 2014
From: baher.esmat at icann.org (Baher Esmat)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 12:05:24 +0000
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
 template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF -
 Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D00D368B.37576%baher.esmat@icann.org>

Thanks Subi and Marilyn for leading this effort.

I can see from the latest draft submitted to the list that each panel has
10+ confirmed panelists plus 7 invited/TBC. Assuming half of those
invited/TBC are confirmed, and despite a more balanced panel may result from
adding them, we are going to have 90-min panel discussion with 13 to 15
panelists, which is quite a large number in my view.

Best
Baher

On 8/10/14, 2:20 PM, "Subi Chaturvedi" <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
> 
> Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are delighted to
> submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th September, 2014.
> 
> We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members and
> active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and made this
> exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
> 1. Olga Cavalli
> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
> 4.Virat Bhatia
> 5.Ana Neves
> 6.Constance Bommelaer
> 7.Kossi Amessinou
> 8.Baher Esmat
> 9.Izumi Aizu
> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
> 11.William Drake
> 12.Jivan
> 13.Patrick Ryan
> 14.Ankhi Das
> 15.Christine Arida
> 16. Filiz
> 17. Paul Wilson
> 18. Mathew Shears
> 19. Jeanette Hoffman
> 20 Adam Peake
> 21. Markus Kummer
> 
> We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has indeed
> benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy and freshness
> of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts have been made to
> include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy questions.
> 
> We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively engage
> with us.
> 
> A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching this
> session in particular through a sustained engagement.
> 
> Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and
> insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained committed to
> the session over the past several months. Also hoping some of them will lend
> us their considerable skills at the venue for substantive rapporteuring.
> 
> 
> 
> warmest
> 
> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/4080f7f7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5062 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/4080f7f7/attachment.p7s>

From iza at anr.org  Sun Aug 10 08:07:40 2014
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 21:07:40 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
 template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF -
 Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKhBTFcKddZAkW8V8Vt6itzECW-o0D8WWMdobTuMv95=Zw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear MAG,


So finally we see the draft for the Main session on IGF ecosystem.


I do not want to "complain" but with due respect, none of the names I
suggested from Asia Pacific are incorporated, without any explanation
except Dr Govind from India. No one from China not to mention
Japan/Korea/Singapore/Pacific islands/Malaysia. Looks much more "North"
than it should be.


Yet there are already so many names there. Unless we trim down the number
of panel/interventions, there will be no meaningful interaction from the
floor.


Something looks wrong, to be straight.


Sorry at this late stage, and appreciate your effort, but could we improve
this composition? It could have been easier if consulted earlier with
specific names explicitly as Bill also pointed out.


best,


izumi




Main/Focus Session Template

1. Title : Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance
Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU,
other fora and Strengthening IGF



Day 3 Date- 4th September, 2014 Time : 9.30-12.30 Venue : Main Room

2. Description/Agenda/Questions:

The Internet has been an engine of growth and development. It informs,
educates and

empowers and is a source of knowledge. The IGF has been a platform for
participants

to discuss, exchange ideas and share good practices with each other. While

recognizing that there is no negotiated outcome over the years the IGF has
both

inspired those with policy making power and acted as a platform to build
bridges

between stakeholders and connect continents. It also through a knowledge
and

capacity building agenda assists in helping people understand how to
maximize

Internet opportunities and address risks and challenges that arise. The
internet

ecosystem has evolved rapidly while the task of connecting the unconnected
still

remains a priority. But over the years the IGF is also become a space that
gives

developing countries the similar opportunities as wealthier nations to
engage in the

debate on Internet governance. While recognizing that, the involvement of
all

stakeholders, from developed as well as developing countries, is necessary
for the

future development of the Internet.

This year with substantive inputs from various global processes and
initiatives like

Netmundial, recommendations on improving the IGF from the Working group on

enhanced co-operation( WGEC) -UNCSTD, WSIS +10 review (ITU), the newly CIGI

(Commission) we hope this 3 hour main session participants will engage in a

productive discussion on the evolving internet ecosystem, identify gaps in
global IG

processes, examine ways to strengthen the IGF and also map the value that
the IGF

holds in amplifying debate dialogue and discussions to reverberate, lean
in, listen and

deliver.

This year the session also turns the lens inwards and focuses on what can
be done

better at the IGF and how. A concerted and conscientious attempt will be
made to

source inputs from the participants and assimilate them through substantive

rapporteuring to be submitted to the secretariat.

The session duration is 3 hours- and it comprises of two panels of 90
minutes each.

Panel 1- addresses the following key policy questions

1. Internet Governance- as a construct across multiple dimensions

2.The role of IGF in Internet Governance

3.The results of global fora on the Internet Governance: NETmundial, WSIS,
UNGA

etc - both positive and negative contribution to the Global IG process.

4. Problems and challenges facing the global Internet governance ecosystem.

5. Differentiation of approaches to the Internet governance of various
stakeholders.

Panel 2- Will respond to the following key questions

6. Requirements for IGF development and strengthening

7.The Future of IGF and Way Forward

The speakers and representatives of key stakeholder groups have been chosen

keeping in mind gender and geographical diversity. The presenters will make
brief

opening remarks, avoid structured presentations, keeping the session
interactive and

inclusive. Four microphone in the respective stakeholder groups will allow
for

maximum minute long interventions from a diverse community with two remote

moderators monitoring online questions and interventions to be included.

All interventions will be kept short. And with innovations in format we are
attempting

unconferencing the discussion.

3. Chair [provide by the Host Country]:

Mr. ?hsan Durdu

4. Panelists:

Panel 1: Role of IGF and the Evolving Internet Ecosystem

1. Thomas Gass (UNDESA) (Invited, TBC) ?Opening Remarks

2. Neelie Kroes (Invited, Confirmed)

3. Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil) (Invited, Confirmed)

4. Kathy Brown (ISOC) (TC) [Invited, Confirmed]

5. Fadi Chehade (ICANN) [Invited, Confirmed]

6. Vint Cerf (Google) (Private Sector) [Invited, Confirmed]

7. Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, Gov) (Invited, Confirmed)

8. Nermine el Saadany Vice Chair WSIS +10 review process (Egypt, Gov)

(Invited, Confirmed)

9. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.) [Invited, Confirmed]

10. Alan Markus (Netmundial @ WEF) (Invited, Confirmed)

11. Mr. M. Salim Ketevanl?o?lu (Nominated by Host Country) (Gov)

(confirmed)

12. Mervi Kultamaa, WSIS Coordinator, CSTD (Invited, Confirmed)

? Tim Berners Lee (W3C) [Invited, TBC]

? Getachew Engida, Deputy Director-General, UNESCO (IGO) (Invited, TBC)

? Carl Bildt (CIGI) Gov (Invited, TBC) New Initiative

? Hamadoun Toure? (ITU) [Invited, TBC]

? Danny Sepulveda (Invited, TBC)

? Byron Holland (CIRA) (TC) [Invited, TBC]

? Andrew Wyckoff (OECD) (Invited, TBC)Panel 2: Strengthening the IGF

1. Philipp Grabensee (Affilias) (TC) (Invited, Confirmed)

2. Avri Doria (TC) (Invited, Confirmed)

3. Mark Carvell (UK,GOV) (Invited, Confirmed) (will also report in inputs

deliberated upon from the Paris Meeting)

4. Jimson Olufuye (WITSA) (Invited, Confirmed)

5. Jeremy Malcolm (EFF) (CS) (Invited, Confirmed)

6. Peter Major (WGEC) (Invited, Confirmed)

7. Joseph Alhadeff (ICC-Basis) PS (Invited, Confirmed)

8. Stephanie Perrin (UT) (Invited, Confirmed)

9. Adam Peake (Glocom) CS (Invited, Confirmed)

10. Dr. Govind (Invited, Confirmed) (TC/GOV)


? Zahid Jamil Private Sector (Invited, TBC)

? Jari Arkko (IETF) (TC) (Invited, TBC)

? Geoff Huston (APNIC) (Invited, TBC

? Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM) (Invited, TBC)

? Alejandro Pisanty - Academia (Invited, TBC) Dynamic Coalition of Core
Internet Values

? Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (CS) (Invited, TBC)

? Ian Peter (CS) (Invited, TBC)

Identified intervention from the floor:

-Patrick Ryan (Google)

5. Moderators:

Panel 1

? Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)/ Vladimir Radunovic (CS) ( Invited/TBC)

? Subi Chaturvedi (CS/Media) (Confirmed) (Moderator/Facilitator)

Panel 2

? Jeanette Hofmann (CS) (confirmed)

? Marilyn Cade (PS) (Confirmed) (Moderator/Facilitator)

6. Remote moderator:

Remote Moderators:

? Samantha Dickinson (TC) (Invited, TBC)

? Samantha Bradshaw (CS) (Invited, TBC)

Substantive Rapporteurs:

? Lee Hibbard (COE) (Invited, TBC)

? Hossam Elgamal (Invited, TBC) (Private Sector)? Ms. Soonjoung Byun
(Invited, TBC) (Gov)

7. Feeder workshops:

Type: Igf & The Future Of The Internet Ecosystem

Tuesday, September 2

11:00am


WS196: IGF & Enhanced Cooperation, Parallel Tracks or Connected

Wednesday, September 3

9:00am

WS140: The Future of the Global and Regional IGFs Post 2015

WS152: Internet Governance: Challenges, Issues, and Roles [CB]

WS80: ccTLDs: partners in developing local ?IG literacy?

11:00am

WS139: Evaluating MS Mechanisms to Address Governance Issues

WS31: Internet Governance: a case for variable geometry? [CB]

WS95: Working together: initiatives to map & frame IG

2:30pm

WS118: Discussion on multistakeholderism in Africa

WS191: ICANN Globalization in an Evolving IG Ecosystem

Thursday, September 4

11:00am

WS157: Crowdsourcing a Magna Carta for 'The Web We Want'

2:30pm

WS153: Institutionalizing the ?Clearing House? Function

WS96: Accountability challenges facing Internet governance today

4:30pm

WS173: Youth involvement in Internet Governance

WS49: The impact of (non-)adoption of Internet standards on cyber security
[CB]

Friday, September 5

9:00am

WS124: Debates: Future IG Architecture

WS134: AIGF Meeting: Future of Internet & Perspective for Africa

11. Special Request to the Secretariat:

Suggested format:

The secretariat is requested to examine the possibility of a townhall
format for this

session, with a deep well in the centre and four mikes down the aisles. And
a digital

timer which would buzz after 60 seconds/1 minute to allow for maximum
interventions from the participants.

MAG Volunteers:

1. Olga Cavall

2.Anriette Esterhuyser

3.Subi Chaturvedi

4.Virat Bhatia

5.Ana Neves

6.Constance Bommelaer

7.Kossi Amessinou

8.Baher Esmat

9.Izumi Aizu

10.Shahram Soboutipour

11.William Drake

12.Jivan

13.Patrick Ryan

14.Ankhi Das

15.Christine Arida

Special thanks to Janis, Mathew and Markus for their inputs.

Submitted:

Thanks

Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade



2014-08-10 20:20 GMT+09:00 Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>:

> Dear All,
>
> Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are delighted
> to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th September, 2014.
>
> We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members and
> active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and made
> this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
> 1. Olga Cavalli
> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
> 4.Virat Bhatia
> 5.Ana Neves
> 6.Constance Bommelaer
> 7.Kossi Amessinou
> 8.Baher Esmat
> 9.Izumi Aizu
> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
> 11.William Drake
> 12.Jivan
> 13.Patrick Ryan
> 14.Ankhi Das
> 15.Christine Arida
> 16. Filiz
> 17. Paul Wilson
> 18. Mathew Shears
> 19. Jeanette Hoffman
> 20 Adam Peake
> 21. Markus Kummer
>
> We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has indeed
> benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy and
> freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts have
> been made to include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy
> questions.
>
> We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively
> engage with us.
>
> A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching this
> session in particular through a sustained engagement.
>
> Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and
> insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained committed
> to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some of them will
> lend us their considerable skills at the venue for substantive
> rapporteuring.
>
>
>
> warmest
>
> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>


-- 
                     >> Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
Japan
www.anr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/690e421e/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Sun Aug 10 08:14:03 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 17:44:03 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
 template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF -
 Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <D00D368B.37576%baher.esmat@icann.org>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<D00D368B.37576%baher.esmat@icann.org>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpLbVmqdv+vvvGx0s+BVnV2MiWQ61-xMYU+mQF60wu2UOw@mail.gmail.com>

thanks Baher. We thought for the first session we must have adequate
representation of all the different significant processes  the speakers
have been told to keep their interventions limited to opening remarks only
in response to how they can strengthen the IGF and linkages can be built
better between their respective process / initiatives.

The remarks limited  2- 3 minutes. and speakers seated in a town hall
format where they become respondents to the inputs from the floor after the
first 40 minutes into each session.

The second is even more interactive.

Also we thought by the end of today if we do not receive feedback we'll
send out regret responses. So the panelists will remain adequate and
balanced.

warmest

Subi
----




On 10 August 2014 17:35, Baher Esmat <baher.esmat at icann.org> wrote:

> Thanks Subi and Marilyn for leading this effort.
>
> I can see from the latest draft submitted to the list that each panel has
> 10+ confirmed panelists plus 7 invited/TBC. Assuming half of those
> invited/TBC are confirmed, and despite a more balanced panel may result
> from adding them, we are going to have 90-min panel discussion with 13 to
> 15 panelists, which is quite a large number in my view.
>
> Best
> Baher
>
> On 8/10/14, 2:20 PM, "Subi Chaturvedi" <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are delighted
> to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th September, 2014.
>
> We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members and
> active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and made
> this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
> 1. Olga Cavalli
> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
> 4.Virat Bhatia
> 5.Ana Neves
> 6.Constance Bommelaer
> 7.Kossi Amessinou
> 8.Baher Esmat
> 9.Izumi Aizu
> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
> 11.William Drake
> 12.Jivan
> 13.Patrick Ryan
> 14.Ankhi Das
> 15.Christine Arida
> 16. Filiz
> 17. Paul Wilson
> 18. Mathew Shears
> 19. Jeanette Hoffman
> 20 Adam Peake
> 21. Markus Kummer
>
> We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has indeed
> benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy and
> freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts have
> been made to include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy
> questions.
>
> We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively
> engage with us.
>
> A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching this
> session in particular through a sustained engagement.
>
> Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and
> insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained committed
> to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some of them will
> lend us their considerable skills at the venue for substantive
> rapporteuring.
>
>
>
> warmest
>
> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/e7d6717a/attachment.htm>

From subichaturvedi at gmail.com  Sun Aug 10 08:18:49 2014
From: subichaturvedi at gmail.com (Subi Chaturvedi)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 17:48:49 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
 template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF -
 Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKhBTFcKddZAkW8V8Vt6itzECW-o0D8WWMdobTuMv95=Zw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+YNoKhBTFcKddZAkW8V8Vt6itzECW-o0D8WWMdobTuMv95=Zw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANRKRpJV2jxhA8n6+cz5TO3FzmJAP_ydSiBcdtZB1dHXuG37XQ@mail.gmail.com>

Izumi. Thank you for your  feedback. We consulted many times and the list
has been online since early feb. the policy questions have also been online
on the list since march. This isn't an individual response. Please refer to
my email response to your email sent in only yesterday. Responded
immediately asking you to come in with contact details.  We have tried our
best accommodating individual speaker suggestions.
Didn't hear back from you. As you do admit it is a rather late intervention.
But it's only a draft and I'm sure everyone will weigh in.
thanks again.

regards

Subi
----



On 10 August 2014 17:37, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org> wrote:

> Dear MAG,
>
>
> So finally we see the draft for the Main session on IGF ecosystem.
>
>
> I do not want to "complain" but with due respect, none of the names I
> suggested from Asia Pacific are incorporated, without any explanation
> except Dr Govind from India. No one from China not to mention
> Japan/Korea/Singapore/Pacific islands/Malaysia. Looks much more "North"
> than it should be.
>
>
> Yet there are already so many names there. Unless we trim down the number
> of panel/interventions, there will be no meaningful interaction from the
> floor.
>
>
> Something looks wrong, to be straight.
>
>
> Sorry at this late stage, and appreciate your effort, but could we improve
> this composition? It could have been easier if consulted earlier with
> specific names explicitly as Bill also pointed out.
>
>
> best,
>
>
> izumi
>
>
>
>
> Main/Focus Session Template
>
> 1. Title : Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance
> Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU,
> other fora and Strengthening IGF
>
>
>
> Day 3 Date- 4th September, 2014 Time : 9.30-12.30 Venue : Main Room
>
> 2. Description/Agenda/Questions:
>
> The Internet has been an engine of growth and development. It informs,
> educates and
>
> empowers and is a source of knowledge. The IGF has been a platform for
> participants
>
> to discuss, exchange ideas and share good practices with each other. While
>
> recognizing that there is no negotiated outcome over the years the IGF has
> both
>
> inspired those with policy making power and acted as a platform to build
> bridges
>
> between stakeholders and connect continents. It also through a knowledge
> and
>
> capacity building agenda assists in helping people understand how to
> maximize
>
> Internet opportunities and address risks and challenges that arise. The
> internet
>
> ecosystem has evolved rapidly while the task of connecting the unconnected
> still
>
> remains a priority. But over the years the IGF is also become a space that
> gives
>
> developing countries the similar opportunities as wealthier nations to
> engage in the
>
> debate on Internet governance. While recognizing that, the involvement of
> all
>
> stakeholders, from developed as well as developing countries, is necessary
> for the
>
> future development of the Internet.
>
> This year with substantive inputs from various global processes and
> initiatives like
>
> Netmundial, recommendations on improving the IGF from the Working group on
>
> enhanced co-operation( WGEC) -UNCSTD, WSIS +10 review (ITU), the newly
> CIGI
>
> (Commission) we hope this 3 hour main session participants will engage in
> a
>
> productive discussion on the evolving internet ecosystem, identify gaps in
> global IG
>
> processes, examine ways to strengthen the IGF and also map the value that
> the IGF
>
> holds in amplifying debate dialogue and discussions to reverberate, lean
> in, listen and
>
> deliver.
>
> This year the session also turns the lens inwards and focuses on what can
> be done
>
> better at the IGF and how. A concerted and conscientious attempt will be
> made to
>
> source inputs from the participants and assimilate them through
> substantive
>
> rapporteuring to be submitted to the secretariat.
>
> The session duration is 3 hours- and it comprises of two panels of 90
> minutes each.
>
> Panel 1- addresses the following key policy questions
>
> 1. Internet Governance- as a construct across multiple dimensions
>
> 2.The role of IGF in Internet Governance
>
> 3.The results of global fora on the Internet Governance: NETmundial, WSIS,
> UNGA
>
> etc - both positive and negative contribution to the Global IG process.
>
> 4. Problems and challenges facing the global Internet governance
> ecosystem.
>
> 5. Differentiation of approaches to the Internet governance of various
> stakeholders.
>
> Panel 2- Will respond to the following key questions
>
> 6. Requirements for IGF development and strengthening
>
> 7.The Future of IGF and Way Forward
>
> The speakers and representatives of key stakeholder groups have been
> chosen
>
> keeping in mind gender and geographical diversity. The presenters will
> make brief
>
> opening remarks, avoid structured presentations, keeping the session
> interactive and
>
> inclusive. Four microphone in the respective stakeholder groups will allow
> for
>
> maximum minute long interventions from a diverse community with two remote
>
> moderators monitoring online questions and interventions to be included.
>
> All interventions will be kept short. And with innovations in format we
> are attempting
>
> unconferencing the discussion.
>
> 3. Chair [provide by the Host Country]:
>
> Mr. ?hsan Durdu
>
> 4. Panelists:
>
> Panel 1: Role of IGF and the Evolving Internet Ecosystem
>
> 1. Thomas Gass (UNDESA) (Invited, TBC) ?Opening Remarks
>
> 2. Neelie Kroes (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 3. Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil) (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 4. Kathy Brown (ISOC) (TC) [Invited, Confirmed]
>
> 5. Fadi Chehade (ICANN) [Invited, Confirmed]
>
> 6. Vint Cerf (Google) (Private Sector) [Invited, Confirmed]
>
> 7. Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, Gov) (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 8. Nermine el Saadany Vice Chair WSIS +10 review process (Egypt, Gov)
>
> (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 9. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.) [Invited, Confirmed]
>
> 10. Alan Markus (Netmundial @ WEF) (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 11. Mr. M. Salim Ketevanl?o?lu (Nominated by Host Country) (Gov)
>
> (confirmed)
>
> 12. Mervi Kultamaa, WSIS Coordinator, CSTD (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> ? Tim Berners Lee (W3C) [Invited, TBC]
>
> ? Getachew Engida, Deputy Director-General, UNESCO (IGO) (Invited, TBC)
>
> ? Carl Bildt (CIGI) Gov (Invited, TBC) New Initiative
>
> ? Hamadoun Toure? (ITU) [Invited, TBC]
>
> ? Danny Sepulveda (Invited, TBC)
>
> ? Byron Holland (CIRA) (TC) [Invited, TBC]
>
> ? Andrew Wyckoff (OECD) (Invited, TBC)Panel 2: Strengthening the IGF
>
> 1. Philipp Grabensee (Affilias) (TC) (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 2. Avri Doria (TC) (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 3. Mark Carvell (UK,GOV) (Invited, Confirmed) (will also report in inputs
>
> deliberated upon from the Paris Meeting)
>
> 4. Jimson Olufuye (WITSA) (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 5. Jeremy Malcolm (EFF) (CS) (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 6. Peter Major (WGEC) (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 7. Joseph Alhadeff (ICC-Basis) PS (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 8. Stephanie Perrin (UT) (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 9. Adam Peake (Glocom) CS (Invited, Confirmed)
>
> 10. Dr. Govind (Invited, Confirmed) (TC/GOV)
>
>
> ? Zahid Jamil Private Sector (Invited, TBC)
>
> ? Jari Arkko (IETF) (TC) (Invited, TBC)
>
> ? Geoff Huston (APNIC) (Invited, TBC
>
> ? Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM) (Invited, TBC)
>
> ? Alejandro Pisanty - Academia (Invited, TBC) Dynamic Coalition of Core
> Internet Values
>
> ? Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (CS) (Invited, TBC)
>
> ? Ian Peter (CS) (Invited, TBC)
>
> Identified intervention from the floor:
>
> -Patrick Ryan (Google)
>
> 5. Moderators:
>
> Panel 1
>
> ? Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)/ Vladimir Radunovic (CS) ( Invited/TBC)
>
> ? Subi Chaturvedi (CS/Media) (Confirmed) (Moderator/Facilitator)
>
> Panel 2
>
> ? Jeanette Hofmann (CS) (confirmed)
>
> ? Marilyn Cade (PS) (Confirmed) (Moderator/Facilitator)
>
> 6. Remote moderator:
>
> Remote Moderators:
>
> ? Samantha Dickinson (TC) (Invited, TBC)
>
> ? Samantha Bradshaw (CS) (Invited, TBC)
>
> Substantive Rapporteurs:
>
> ? Lee Hibbard (COE) (Invited, TBC)
>
> ? Hossam Elgamal (Invited, TBC) (Private Sector)? Ms. Soonjoung Byun
> (Invited, TBC) (Gov)
>
> 7. Feeder workshops:
>
> Type: Igf & The Future Of The Internet Ecosystem
>
> Tuesday, September 2
>
> 11:00am
>
>
> WS196: IGF & Enhanced Cooperation, Parallel Tracks or Connected
>
> Wednesday, September 3
>
> 9:00am
>
> WS140: The Future of the Global and Regional IGFs Post 2015
>
> WS152: Internet Governance: Challenges, Issues, and Roles [CB]
>
> WS80: ccTLDs: partners in developing local ?IG literacy?
>
> 11:00am
>
> WS139: Evaluating MS Mechanisms to Address Governance Issues
>
> WS31: Internet Governance: a case for variable geometry? [CB]
>
> WS95: Working together: initiatives to map & frame IG
>
> 2:30pm
>
> WS118: Discussion on multistakeholderism in Africa
>
> WS191: ICANN Globalization in an Evolving IG Ecosystem
>
> Thursday, September 4
>
> 11:00am
>
> WS157: Crowdsourcing a Magna Carta for 'The Web We Want'
>
> 2:30pm
>
> WS153: Institutionalizing the ?Clearing House? Function
>
> WS96: Accountability challenges facing Internet governance today
>
> 4:30pm
>
> WS173: Youth involvement in Internet Governance
>
> WS49: The impact of (non-)adoption of Internet standards on cyber security
> [CB]
>
> Friday, September 5
>
> 9:00am
>
> WS124: Debates: Future IG Architecture
>
> WS134: AIGF Meeting: Future of Internet & Perspective for Africa
>
> 11. Special Request to the Secretariat:
>
> Suggested format:
>
> The secretariat is requested to examine the possibility of a townhall
> format for this
>
> session, with a deep well in the centre and four mikes down the aisles.
> And a digital
>
> timer which would buzz after 60 seconds/1 minute to allow for maximum
> interventions from the participants.
>
> MAG Volunteers:
>
> 1. Olga Cavall
>
> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
>
> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
>
> 4.Virat Bhatia
>
> 5.Ana Neves
>
> 6.Constance Bommelaer
>
> 7.Kossi Amessinou
>
> 8.Baher Esmat
>
> 9.Izumi Aizu
>
> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
>
> 11.William Drake
>
> 12.Jivan
>
> 13.Patrick Ryan
>
> 14.Ankhi Das
>
> 15.Christine Arida
>
> Special thanks to Janis, Mathew and Markus for their inputs.
>
> Submitted:
>
> Thanks
>
> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
>
>
>
> 2014-08-10 20:20 GMT+09:00 Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are delighted
>> to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th September, 2014.
>>
>> We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members
>> and active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and
>> made this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
>> 1. Olga Cavalli
>> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
>> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
>> 4.Virat Bhatia
>> 5.Ana Neves
>> 6.Constance Bommelaer
>> 7.Kossi Amessinou
>> 8.Baher Esmat
>> 9.Izumi Aizu
>> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
>> 11.William Drake
>> 12.Jivan
>> 13.Patrick Ryan
>> 14.Ankhi Das
>> 15.Christine Arida
>> 16. Filiz
>> 17. Paul Wilson
>> 18. Mathew Shears
>> 19. Jeanette Hoffman
>> 20 Adam Peake
>> 21. Markus Kummer
>>
>> We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has
>> indeed benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy and
>> freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts have
>> been made to include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy
>> questions.
>>
>> We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively
>> engage with us.
>>
>> A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching this
>> session in particular through a sustained engagement.
>>
>> Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and
>> insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained committed
>> to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some of them will
>> lend us their considerable skills at the venue for substantive
>> rapporteuring.
>>
>>
>>
>> warmest
>>
>> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>                      >> Izumi Aizu <<
> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
> Japan
> www.anr.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/3f9a98c9/attachment.htm>

From avri at acm.org  Sun Aug 10 08:41:48 2014
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 08:41:48 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of
 Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial +
 CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53E7688C.2090007@acm.org>

Dear Subi and Marilyn,

I notice my name is still on panel list.  As I said earlier, when I was
trying to contribute to the structuring of this critical session, I have
prior commitments to other sessions that got scheduled the same time slot.

thanks and good luck with your session.

avri

On 10-Aug-14 07:20, Subi Chaturvedi wrote:
> Dear All,
> 
> Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are
> delighted to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th
> September, 2014.
> 
> We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members
> and active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and
> made this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
> 1. Olga Cavalli
> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
> 4.Virat Bhatia
> 5.Ana Neves
> 6.Constance Bommelaer
> 7.Kossi Amessinou
> 8.Baher Esmat
> 9.Izumi Aizu
> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
> 11.William Drake
> 12.Jivan
> 13.Patrick Ryan
> 14.Ankhi Das
> 15.Christine Arida
> 16. Filiz
> 17. Paul Wilson
> 18. Mathew Shears
> 19. Jeanette Hoffman
> 20 Adam Peake
> 21. Markus Kummer
> 
> We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has
> indeed benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy
> and freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts
> have been made to include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy
> questions. 
> 
> We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively
> engage with us.
> 
> A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching
> this session in particular through a sustained engagement.
> 
> Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and
> insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained
> committed to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some
> of them will lend us their considerable skills at the venue for
> substantive rapporteuring.
> 
> 
> 
> warmest
> 
> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> 



From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Sun Aug 10 09:17:18 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 09:17:18 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
	template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of
	the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU,
	other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKhBTFcKddZAkW8V8Vt6itzECW-o0D8WWMdobTuMv95=Zw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+YNoKhBTFcKddZAkW8V8Vt6itzECW-o0D8WWMdobTuMv95=Zw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY406-EAS103B499ACD1EA28290DEAF5D3EC0@phx.gbl>

Colleagues, 

We certainly have received a large number of names from many commentors.  
And, this overarching area of interest has a number of other events, including on Day 0, when relevant discussions will happen. 

I realize that we are all now in the process of looking at all the main sessions, including the session on IANA Transition and the Emerging Issues for Day 4.  This process and feedback will allow any needed fine tuning. 

Thanks to Bill for sharing the information about the e-book release on Day 0.  That was helpful, Bill, to see the list of contributors. 

If anyone thinks that we have missed a workshop of relevance to the list, please share that with Subi and me. 

I join Subi in thanking all for your inputs along the way. 

Sent from my iPad

> On Aug 10, 2014, at 8:08 AM, "Izumi AIZU" <iza at anr.org> wrote:
> 
> Dear MAG,
> 
> So finally we see the draft for the Main session on IGF ecosystem.
> 
> I do not want to "complain" but with due respect, none of the names I suggested from Asia Pacific are incorporated, without any explanation except Dr Govind from India. No one from China not to mention Japan/Korea/Singapore/Pacific islands/Malaysia. Looks much more "North" than it should be.
> 
> Yet there are already so many names there. Unless we trim down the number of panel/interventions, there will be no meaningful interaction from the floor.
> 
> Something looks wrong, to be straight.
> 
> Sorry at this late stage, and appreciate your effort, but could we improve this composition? It could have been easier if consulted earlier with specific names explicitly as Bill also pointed out.
> 
> best,
> 
> 
> 
> izumi
> 
> 
> 
> Main/Focus Session Template
> 
> 1. Title : Main/Focus Session: Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem/Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
> 
> 
> Day 3 Date- 4th September, 2014 Time : 9.30-12.30 Venue : Main Room
> 
> 2. Description/Agenda/Questions: 
> The Internet has been an engine of growth and development. It informs, educates and 
> empowers and is a source of knowledge. The IGF has been a platform for participants 
> to discuss, exchange ideas and share good practices with each other. While 
> recognizing that there is no negotiated outcome over the years the IGF has both 
> inspired those with policy making power and acted as a platform to build bridges 
> between stakeholders and connect continents. It also through a knowledge and 
> capacity building agenda assists in helping people understand how to maximize 
> Internet opportunities and address risks and challenges that arise. The internet 
> ecosystem has evolved rapidly while the task of connecting the unconnected still 
> remains a priority. But over the years the IGF is also become a space that gives 
> developing countries the similar opportunities as wealthier nations to engage in the 
> debate on Internet governance. While recognizing that, the involvement of all 
> stakeholders, from developed as well as developing countries, is necessary for the 
> future development of the Internet. 
> 
> This year with substantive inputs from various global processes and initiatives like 
> Netmundial, recommendations on improving the IGF from the Working group on 
> enhanced co-operation( WGEC) -UNCSTD, WSIS +10 review (ITU), the newly CIGI 
> (Commission) we hope this 3 hour main session participants will engage in a 
> productive discussion on the evolving internet ecosystem, identify gaps in global IG 
> processes, examine ways to strengthen the IGF and also map the value that the IGF 
> holds in amplifying debate dialogue and discussions to reverberate, lean in, listen and 
> deliver.
> 
> This year the session also turns the lens inwards and focuses on what can be done 
> better at the IGF and how. A concerted and conscientious attempt will be made to 
> source inputs from the participants and assimilate them through substantive 
> rapporteuring to be submitted to the secretariat.
> The session duration is 3 hours- and it comprises of two panels of 90 minutes each.
> 
> Panel 1- addresses the following key policy questions 
> 1. Internet Governance- as a construct across multiple dimensions
> 2.The role of IGF in Internet Governance
> 3.The results of global fora on the Internet Governance: NETmundial, WSIS, UNGA 
> etc - both positive and negative contribution to the Global IG process. 
> 4. Problems and challenges facing the global Internet governance ecosystem. 
> 5. Differentiation of approaches to the Internet governance of various stakeholders.
> 
> Panel 2- Will respond to the following key questions
> 6. Requirements for IGF development and strengthening
> 7.The Future of IGF and Way Forward
> The speakers and representatives of key stakeholder groups have been chosen 
> keeping in mind gender and geographical diversity. The presenters will make brief 
> opening remarks, avoid structured presentations, keeping the session interactive and 
> inclusive. Four microphone in the respective stakeholder groups will allow for 
> maximum minute long interventions from a diverse community with two remote 
> moderators monitoring online questions and interventions to be included.
> All interventions will be kept short. And with innovations in format we are attempting 
> unconferencing the discussion.
> 
> 3. Chair [provide by the Host Country]:
> Mr. ?hsan Durdu
> 
> 4. Panelists: 
> Panel 1: Role of IGF and the Evolving Internet Ecosystem
> 1. Thomas Gass (UNDESA) (Invited, TBC) ?Opening Remarks
> 2. Neelie Kroes (Invited, Confirmed)
> 3. Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil) (Invited, Confirmed)
> 4. Kathy Brown (ISOC) (TC) [Invited, Confirmed]
> 5. Fadi Chehade (ICANN) [Invited, Confirmed]
> 6. Vint Cerf (Google) (Private Sector) [Invited, Confirmed]
> 7. Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, Gov) (Invited, Confirmed)
> 8. Nermine el Saadany Vice Chair WSIS +10 review process (Egypt, Gov)
> (Invited, Confirmed)
> 9. Milton Mueller (Syracuse U.) [Invited, Confirmed]
> 10. Alan Markus (Netmundial @ WEF) (Invited, Confirmed) 
> 11. Mr. M. Salim Ketevanl?o?lu (Nominated by Host Country) (Gov) 
> (confirmed)
> 12. Mervi Kultamaa, WSIS Coordinator, CSTD (Invited, Confirmed)
> 
> ? Tim Berners Lee (W3C) [Invited, TBC]
> ? Getachew Engida, Deputy Director-General, UNESCO (IGO) (Invited, TBC)
> ? Carl Bildt (CIGI) Gov (Invited, TBC) New Initiative
> ? Hamadoun Toure? (ITU) [Invited, TBC]
> ? Danny Sepulveda (Invited, TBC)
> ? Byron Holland (CIRA) (TC) [Invited, TBC]
> ? Andrew Wyckoff (OECD) (Invited, TBC)Panel 2: Strengthening the IGF
> 
> 1. Philipp Grabensee (Affilias) (TC) (Invited, Confirmed)
> 2. Avri Doria (TC) (Invited, Confirmed)
> 3. Mark Carvell (UK,GOV) (Invited, Confirmed) (will also report in inputs 
> deliberated upon from the Paris Meeting)
> 4. Jimson Olufuye (WITSA) (Invited, Confirmed)
> 5. Jeremy Malcolm (EFF) (CS) (Invited, Confirmed)
> 6. Peter Major (WGEC) (Invited, Confirmed)
> 7. Joseph Alhadeff (ICC-Basis) PS (Invited, Confirmed)
> 8. Stephanie Perrin (UT) (Invited, Confirmed)
> 9. Adam Peake (Glocom) CS (Invited, Confirmed)
> 10. Dr. Govind (Invited, Confirmed) (TC/GOV)
> 
> ? Zahid Jamil Private Sector (Invited, TBC)
> ? Jari Arkko (IETF) (TC) (Invited, TBC)
> ? Geoff Huston (APNIC) (Invited, TBC
> ? Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM) (Invited, TBC)
> ? Alejandro Pisanty - Academia (Invited, TBC) Dynamic Coalition of Core Internet Values
> ? Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (CS) (Invited, TBC)
> ? Ian Peter (CS) (Invited, TBC)
> Identified intervention from the floor:
> -Patrick Ryan (Google) 
> 
> 5. Moderators:
> 
> Panel 1
> ? Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)/ Vladimir Radunovic (CS) ( Invited/TBC)
> ? Subi Chaturvedi (CS/Media) (Confirmed) (Moderator/Facilitator)
> 
> Panel 2
> ? Jeanette Hofmann (CS) (confirmed)
> ? Marilyn Cade (PS) (Confirmed) (Moderator/Facilitator)
> 
> 6. Remote moderator:
> 
> Remote Moderators:
> ? Samantha Dickinson (TC) (Invited, TBC)
> ? Samantha Bradshaw (CS) (Invited, TBC)
> 
> Substantive Rapporteurs:
> ? Lee Hibbard (COE) (Invited, TBC)
> ? Hossam Elgamal (Invited, TBC) (Private Sector)? Ms. Soonjoung Byun (Invited, TBC) (Gov)
> 
> 7. Feeder workshops:
> Type: Igf & The Future Of The Internet Ecosystem 
> Tuesday, September 2
> 11:00am
> 
> 
> WS196: IGF & Enhanced Cooperation, Parallel Tracks or Connected
> Wednesday, September 3
> 9:00am
> 
> WS140: The Future of the Global and Regional IGFs Post 2015
> 
> WS152: Internet Governance: Challenges, Issues, and Roles [CB]
> 
> WS80: ccTLDs: partners in developing local ?IG literacy?
> 11:00am
> 
> WS139: Evaluating MS Mechanisms to Address Governance Issues
> 
> WS31: Internet Governance: a case for variable geometry? [CB]
> 
> WS95: Working together: initiatives to map & frame IG
> 2:30pm
> 
> WS118: Discussion on multistakeholderism in Africa
> 
> WS191: ICANN Globalization in an Evolving IG Ecosystem
> Thursday, September 4
> 11:00am
> 
> WS157: Crowdsourcing a Magna Carta for 'The Web We Want'
> 2:30pm
> 
> WS153: Institutionalizing the ?Clearing House? Function
> 
> WS96: Accountability challenges facing Internet governance today
> 4:30pm
> 
> WS173: Youth involvement in Internet Governance
> 
> WS49: The impact of (non-)adoption of Internet standards on cyber security [CB]
> Friday, September 5
> 9:00am
> 
> WS124: Debates: Future IG Architecture
> 
> WS134: AIGF Meeting: Future of Internet & Perspective for Africa
> 
> 11. Special Request to the Secretariat:
> 
> Suggested format:
> The secretariat is requested to examine the possibility of a townhall format for this 
> session, with a deep well in the centre and four mikes down the aisles. And a digital 
> timer which would buzz after 60 seconds/1 minute to allow for maximum interventions from the participants.
> 
> MAG Volunteers: 
> 1. Olga Cavall
> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
> 4.Virat Bhatia
> 5.Ana Neves
> 6.Constance Bommelaer
> 7.Kossi Amessinou
> 8.Baher Esmat
> 9.Izumi Aizu
> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
> 11.William Drake
> 12.Jivan
> 13.Patrick Ryan
> 14.Ankhi Das
> 15.Christine Arida
> Special thanks to Janis, Mathew and Markus for their inputs.
> Submitted:
> Thanks
> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
> 
> 
> 
> 2014-08-10 20:20 GMT+09:00 Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>:
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are delighted to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th September, 2014.
>> 
>> We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members and active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and made this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
>> 1. Olga Cavalli
>> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
>> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
>> 4.Virat Bhatia
>> 5.Ana Neves
>> 6.Constance Bommelaer
>> 7.Kossi Amessinou
>> 8.Baher Esmat
>> 9.Izumi Aizu
>> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
>> 11.William Drake
>> 12.Jivan
>> 13.Patrick Ryan
>> 14.Ankhi Das
>> 15.Christine Arida
>> 16. Filiz
>> 17. Paul Wilson
>> 18. Mathew Shears
>> 19. Jeanette Hoffman
>> 20 Adam Peake
>> 21. Markus Kummer
>> 
>> We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has indeed benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy and freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts have been made to include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy questions. 
>> 
>> We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively engage with us.
>> 
>> A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching this session in particular through a sustained engagement.
>> 
>> Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained committed to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some of them will lend us their considerable skills at the venue for substantive rapporteuring.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> warmest
>> 
>> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
>                      >> Izumi Aizu <<
> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,          
> Japan
> www.anr.org
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/21994502/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Evolintgov2014 mailing list
Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

From iza at anr.org  Sun Aug 10 09:16:53 2014
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 22:16:53 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Query: IGF Main Session -
 Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <FB0D3110-8ADE-41A2-9CFE-CC15E8631D04@glocom.ac.jp>
References: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F15@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
	<84632B3F-AB1C-4527-9179-28D648B357A7@gmail.com>
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F7C@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
	<CA+YNoKhBrvB+d6kQ6aGVBdm1a9CZKJ87D3S-Crd-vB3yVy8MEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpJVeEFQyko77y5YGC5VkNVKqtFhLQfhagayb0A2vRZthg@mail.gmail.com>
	<FB0D3110-8ADE-41A2-9CFE-CC15E8631D04@glocom.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKjOFnd-fUOE_sLoPgimtnc34UPNM1Y1Lrh=P7fvqZa=PA@mail.gmail.com>

Here are the contacts:

Edmon Chung <edmon at dotasia.org> or Edmon Chung <edmon at afilias.info>

Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore), tphang <TPHANG at ntu.edu.sg>

Hong Xue (China), Hong Xue <hongxueipr at gmail.com>

Am not sure who you meant for Japanese team, are they you mean from the
Ministry of Communications? I guess there are enough from govs already.

izumi



2014-08-09 21:14 GMT+09:00 Adam <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>:

> Hi Subi, comment below:
>
>
> On Aug 9, 2014, at 2:55 PM, Subi Chaturvedi wrote:
>
> > Izumi better late than never :) Though the list has been updated. But
> you have made some excellent suggestions here.
> >
> > Have responded inline below.
> >
> > On 9 August 2014 08:57, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org> wrote:
> > Very sorry for this very late intervention.
> >
> > Looking at the list of names below, I see very few people from Asia and
> Pacific, especially East Asia, South East Asia and South Asia as well as
> Pacific Islands.
> >
> > I see no Chinese or Indian, considering the user population, it is
> better to include them.
> >
> >
> > For Government, only Mohammed Al Qurashi (KSA) - from Saudi Arabia which
> is
> > more of Middle East than Asia Pacific.
> >
> > I would suggest someone from any other Asian countries - say China, Hong
> Kong, Korea, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia etc.
> >  Dr. Govind (India) - just hosted APrIGF in Delhi - will be very good.:
> >
> > Dr. Govind has been invited. In both his capacities as the organiser of
> APrIGF , the CEO of NIXI and following up on Anriette suggestion of
> including some host country government reps. India hosted the IGF in 2008
> in Hyderabad and Dr. Govind was the nodal officer for it. We have also been
> provided a Chair and a speaker for this session from the host country. It
> would be good to have two minute interventions from the some of the other
> host countries as well. Indonesia, Azerbaijan and others on the value that
> IGF has created for and in the host countries, inline with Janis's larger
> call.
> >
> > Amongst Private Sector, Technical Community and Civil Society, I see
> > Zahid from Pakistan, Geoff Huston from Australia and Adam Peake
> (Japan/UK).
> >
> > Bill had suggested Jeremy or Adam Peake from CS. Jeremy has responded in
> the affirmative Adam is yet to respond.
> >
>
>
> I've replied a couple of times,
>
> On Jul 23, 2014, at 4:55 PM, Adam wrote:
>
> > Is there a current outline of the session and topics to be discussed.
>  Looked through the list archives and nothing stood out <
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/>
> >
> > If there is a NETmundial focus then I'd be happy to contribute.
> >
> > Adam
> >
>
>
> and yesterday:
>
>
> On Aug 8, 2014, at 6:39 PM, Adam wrote:
>
> > Thanks Bill.
> >
> > I'd be happy to help out, contribute if I can -- have some idea of
> WSIS/IGF/NETmundial.
> >
> > But person I'd personally like to hear from is Marilaia Maciel.  She's
> been following most of the relevant activities, and very involved in
> coordinating the roadmap section of the NETmundial document (I spent more
> time on principles.)  I think there's been some misunderstanding about
> NETmundial's suggestions regarding the IGF, and she may put those straight.
> >
> > Adam
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>
> > I am not opposing to any single individuals at all, but having them all
> three
> > seem too Caucasian oriented, (sorry to bring this), no Oriental or Asian
> or Pacific
> > people there.
> >
> > We have good candidates here again, people like:
> >
> > Edmon Chung (Hong Kong), Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore), Hong Xue (China),
> > Ram Mohan (India), Rajesh Chharia (India), Rajnesh D Singh, (Fiji),
> Hongbin Chu, (China), Anja Kovacs (India) YJ Park (korea).
> >
> > We have some good names from CS now.
> >
> > I did ask around for the Japanese team which made an excellent
> presentation at the WGEC meeting in which they did a comprehensive 8 year
> evaluation of IGF. They would make for an excellent intervention in this
> session. Would be grateful if you can connect us with them.
> >
> > We want the panel to be balanced, relevant and diverse.
> >
> > Also a connect with Prof. Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore) would also be great.
> >
> > We're trying to not repeat people from the same networks and
> organisations.
> >
> > Thanks again for your input. Sending the updated draft shortly. An early
> response from you would be much appreciated.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Subi
> >
> >
> >
> > Again sorry for this belated response, but I hope some of the factors be
> included.
> >
> > I didn't put any Japanese as I don't want to make this a kind of selfish
> intervention, but there are also good candidates from Japan ;-)
> >
> > izumi
> >
> >> rally leaving off MAG members for now):
> >>
> >> Government/IGO:
> >>      ? Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi)?for which panel?]
> >>      ? Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor?for
> panel 1?)
> >>      ? Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
> >>      ? Norberto Berner (Argentina)
> >>      ? Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
> >>      ? Larry Strickling (US)
> >>      ? Ed Vaizy (UK)
> >>      ? Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
> >>      ? Alice Munyua (AU)
> >> Private Sector:
> >>      ? Danil Kerimi (WEF)
> >>      ? Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
> >>      ? Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
> >>      ? Phil Rushton (BT)
> >>      ? Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
> >> Technical Community:
> >>      ? Jari Arkko (IETF)
> >>      ? Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
> >>      ? Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
> >>      ? Byron Holland (CIRA)
> >>      ? Geoff Huston (APNIC)
> >>      ? Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
> >> Civil Society:
> >>      ? Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
> >>      ? Stephanie Perrin (UT)
> >>      ? Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
> >>      ? Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
> >>      ? Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
> >>      ? Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
> >>      ? Marilia Maciel (FGV)
> >>      ? Adam Peake (Glocom)
> >
> >
> > 2014-08-08 22:42 GMT+09:00 Bhatia, Virat <virat.bhatia at intl.att.com>:
> > Hi Bill,
> >
> > From everything you have mentioned, we are in complete agreement.
> >
> > Let me explain.
> >
> > MAG members on main session
> >
> > (i)      My comments are purely aimed at responding to the questions
> raised by Subi in her email ?regarding serving MAG members as panelists on
> a main session? to which Jeanette provided a response, and Subi
> acknowledged, seeking comments to ?refresh memory?.  I guess she is trying
> to decide on whether or not MAG members can accept a speaking / moderator
> roles on the main session she is helping to organize.
> >
> >
> >
> > (ii)    On the issue of main sessions, Janis, you, I and I believe
> everyone, agreed to keep the limit to 1 for 2014 IGF, based on his email of
> July 24, which you have quoted below. There is no quarrel on that issue. In
> fact your email quoting Janis reinforces my point and gives clear guidance
> for the organizers of main sessions.
> >
> >
> >
> > MAG members on workshops
> >
> > I have neither mentioned in my email,  nor wish by any means, to
> recommend that MAG members, who have accepted speaker roles for 3-4 or in
> some cases, even 5 workshops, should decline at this stage.  That would be
> terrible for the organizers of those workshops.  My point was limited to
> responding to the query about MAG members on main sessions only.
> >
> >  The fact that I am on 2 workshops is only self-disclosure.  It is by no
> means an imposition on others, since their commitments, in any event, were
> made much before Janis?s email to workshop organizers, and must be honored.
> Like you, I don?t see Janis?s email of ?1/3 max? as a hard and fast, where
> MAG members on workshops are concerned.
> >
> > I hope this settles the issue for all organizers and MAG members unless
> anyone has a different interpretation from what has been agreed here.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Virat Bhatia
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Igfmaglist mailing list
> > Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> > http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> > Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> >
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>


-- 
                     >> Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
Japan
www.anr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/1ac9d1fa/attachment.htm>

From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Sun Aug 10 09:48:42 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 09:48:42 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
	template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of
	the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU,
	other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <D00D368B.37576%baher.esmat@icann.org>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<D00D368B.37576%baher.esmat@icann.org>
Message-ID: <BAY406-EAS42187C8790FA441049D0AD8D3EC0@phx.gbl>

thanks, Baher, we are looking at all the main sessions, including Day 0, and assessing overlap and ALSO recognizing many who were invited initially did not accept. We are also assessing the gaps that may exist due to geo diversity and will continue to listen closely to the comments of our MAG colleagues and others who are participating on the Evolintgov list. 

Thanks for your comment.

Marilyn and Subi

Sent from my iPad

> On Aug 10, 2014, at 8:05 AM, "Baher Esmat" <baher.esmat at icann.org> wrote:
> 
> Thanks Subi and Marilyn for leading this effort. 
> 
> I can see from the latest draft submitted to the list that each panel has 10+ confirmed panelists plus 7 invited/TBC. Assuming half of those invited/TBC are confirmed, and despite a more balanced panel may result from adding them, we are going to have 90-min panel discussion with 13 to 15 panelists, which is quite a large number in my view. 
> 
> Best
> Baher
> 
> On 8/10/14, 2:20 PM, "Subi Chaturvedi" <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are delighted to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th September, 2014.
> 
> We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members and active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and made this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
> 1. Olga Cavalli
> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
> 4.Virat Bhatia
> 5.Ana Neves
> 6.Constance Bommelaer
> 7.Kossi Amessinou
> 8.Baher Esmat
> 9.Izumi Aizu
> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
> 11.William Drake
> 12.Jivan
> 13.Patrick Ryan
> 14.Ankhi Das
> 15.Christine Arida
> 16. Filiz
> 17. Paul Wilson
> 18. Mathew Shears
> 19. Jeanette Hoffman
> 20 Adam Peake
> 21. Markus Kummer
> 
> We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has indeed benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy and freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts have been made to include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy questions. 
> 
> We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively engage with us.
> 
> A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching this session in particular through a sustained engagement.
> 
> Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained committed to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some of them will lend us their considerable skills at the venue for substantive rapporteuring.
> 
> 
> 
> warmest
> 
> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/00af4e29/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Evolintgov2014 mailing list
Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Sun Aug 10 10:10:25 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 10:10:25 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Query: IGF Main Session -
 Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKjOFnd-fUOE_sLoPgimtnc34UPNM1Y1Lrh=P7fvqZa=PA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>,
	<53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>,
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F15@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>,
	<84632B3F-AB1C-4527-9179-28D648B357A7@gmail.com>,
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F7C@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>,
	<CA+YNoKhBrvB+d6kQ6aGVBdm1a9CZKJ87D3S-Crd-vB3yVy8MEg@mail.gmail.com>,
	<CANRKRpJVeEFQyko77y5YGC5VkNVKqtFhLQfhagayb0A2vRZthg@mail.gmail.com>,
	<FB0D3110-8ADE-41A2-9CFE-CC15E8631D04@glocom.ac.jp>,
	<CA+YNoKjOFnd-fUOE_sLoPgimtnc34UPNM1Y1Lrh=P7fvqZa=PA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY169-W134763760D6E0ED7629A9D0D3EC0@phx.gbl>


 Thanks, Izumi. this is helpful and we will take a look at the geographic diversity and also some names that may be coming in from others from the region and address this in more detail. Your comments are appreciated. 
Re the reference to the Japanese 'team', I think that was a reference to the excellent report provided by Kyoto University Professor into CSTD WG EC, but Subi and I have agreed that is not suited to this session. 
Nevertheless, it was a substantive contribution into the CSTD WG EC, and for anyone interested off list, I am sure I can obtain the link to share, just as background. 

 Marilyn and SubiFrom: iza at anr.org
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 22:16:53 +0900
To: subichaturvedi at gmail.com
CC: Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org; evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] Query: IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update

Here are the contacts: 
Edmon Chung <edmon at dotasia.org> or Edmon Chung <edmon at afilias.info>



Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore), tphang <TPHANG at ntu.edu.sg>


Hong Xue (China), Hong Xue <hongxueipr at gmail.com>



Am not sure who you meant for Japanese team, are they you mean from the Ministry of Communications? I guess there are enough from govs already.


izumi




2014-08-09 21:14 GMT+09:00 Adam <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>:




Hi Subi, comment below:





On Aug 9, 2014, at 2:55 PM, Subi Chaturvedi wrote:



> Izumi better late than never :) Though the list has been updated. But you have made some excellent suggestions here.

>

> Have responded inline below.

>

> On 9 August 2014 08:57, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org> wrote:

> Very sorry for this very late intervention.

>

> Looking at the list of names below, I see very few people from Asia and Pacific, especially East Asia, South East Asia and South Asia as well as Pacific Islands.

>

> I see no Chinese or Indian, considering the user population, it is better to include them.

>

>

> For Government, only Mohammed Al Qurashi (KSA) - from Saudi Arabia which is

> more of Middle East than Asia Pacific.

>

> I would suggest someone from any other Asian countries - say China, Hong Kong, Korea, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia etc.

>  Dr. Govind (India) - just hosted APrIGF in Delhi - will be very good.:

>

> Dr. Govind has been invited. In both his capacities as the organiser of APrIGF , the CEO of NIXI and following up on Anriette suggestion of including some host country government reps. India hosted the IGF in 2008 in Hyderabad and Dr. Govind was the nodal officer for it. We have also been provided a Chair and a speaker for this session from the host country. It would be good to have two minute interventions from the some of the other host countries as well. Indonesia, Azerbaijan and others on the value that IGF has created for and in the host countries, inline with Janis's larger call.





>

> Amongst Private Sector, Technical Community and Civil Society, I see

> Zahid from Pakistan, Geoff Huston from Australia and Adam Peake (Japan/UK).

>

> Bill had suggested Jeremy or Adam Peake from CS. Jeremy has responded in the affirmative Adam is yet to respond.

>





I've replied a couple of times,



On Jul 23, 2014, at 4:55 PM, Adam wrote:



> Is there a current outline of the session and topics to be discussed.  Looked through the list archives and nothing stood out <http://mail.intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/>





>

> If there is a NETmundial focus then I'd be happy to contribute.

>

> Adam

>





and yesterday:





On Aug 8, 2014, at 6:39 PM, Adam wrote:



> Thanks Bill.

>

> I'd be happy to help out, contribute if I can -- have some idea of WSIS/IGF/NETmundial.

>

> But person I'd personally like to hear from is Marilaia Maciel.  She's been following most of the relevant activities, and very involved in coordinating the roadmap section of the NETmundial document (I spent more time on principles.)  I think there's been some misunderstanding about NETmundial's suggestions regarding the IGF, and she may put those straight.





>

> Adam

>

>









Adam









> I am not opposing to any single individuals at all, but having them all three

> seem too Caucasian oriented, (sorry to bring this), no Oriental or Asian or Pacific

> people there.

>

> We have good candidates here again, people like:

>

> Edmon Chung (Hong Kong), Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore), Hong Xue (China),

> Ram Mohan (India), Rajesh Chharia (India), Rajnesh D Singh, (Fiji), Hongbin Chu, (China), Anja Kovacs (India) YJ Park (korea).

>

> We have some good names from CS now.

>

> I did ask around for the Japanese team which made an excellent presentation at the WGEC meeting in which they did a comprehensive 8 year evaluation of IGF. They would make for an excellent intervention in this session. Would be grateful if you can connect us with them.





>

> We want the panel to be balanced, relevant and diverse.

>

> Also a connect with Prof. Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore) would also be great.

>

> We're trying to not repeat people from the same networks and organisations.

>

> Thanks again for your input. Sending the updated draft shortly. An early response from you would be much appreciated.

>

> Regards

>

> Subi

>

>

>

> Again sorry for this belated response, but I hope some of the factors be included.

>

> I didn't put any Japanese as I don't want to make this a kind of selfish intervention, but there are also good candidates from Japan ;-)

>

> izumi

>

>> rally leaving off MAG members for now):

>>

>> Government/IGO:

>>      . Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi).for which panel?]

>>      . Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor.for panel 1?)

>>      . Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)

>>      . Norberto Berner (Argentina)

>>      . Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)

>>      . Larry Strickling (US)

>>      . Ed Vaizy (UK)

>>      . Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)

>>      . Alice Munyua (AU)

>> Private Sector:

>>      . Danil Kerimi (WEF)

>>      . Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)

>>      . Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)

>>      . Phil Rushton (BT)

>>      . Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)

>> Technical Community:

>>      . Jari Arkko (IETF)

>>      . Tim Berners Lee (W3C)

>>      . Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)

>>      . Byron Holland (CIRA)

>>      . Geoff Huston (APNIC)

>>      . Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)

>> Civil Society:

>>      . Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)

>>      . Stephanie Perrin (UT)

>>      . Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)

>>      . Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)

>>      . Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)

>>      . Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)

>>      . Marilia Maciel (FGV)

>>      . Adam Peake (Glocom)

>

>

> 2014-08-08 22:42 GMT+09:00 Bhatia, Virat <virat.bhatia at intl.att.com>:

> Hi Bill,

>

> From everything you have mentioned, we are in complete agreement.

>

> Let me explain.

>

> MAG members on main session

>

> (i)      My comments are purely aimed at responding to the questions raised by Subi in her email "regarding serving MAG members as panelists on a main session" to which Jeanette provided a response, and Subi acknowledged, seeking comments to "refresh memory".  I guess she is trying to decide on whether or not MAG members can accept a speaking / moderator roles on the main session she is helping to organize.





>

>

>

> (ii)    On the issue of main sessions, Janis, you, I and I believe everyone, agreed to keep the limit to 1 for 2014 IGF, based on his email of July 24, which you have quoted below. There is no quarrel on that issue. In fact your email quoting Janis reinforces my point and gives clear guidance for the organizers of main sessions.





>

>

>

> MAG members on workshops

>

> I have neither mentioned in my email,  nor wish by any means, to recommend that MAG members, who have accepted speaker roles for 3-4 or in some cases, even 5 workshops, should decline at this stage.  That would be terrible for the organizers of those workshops.  My point was limited to responding to the query about MAG members on main sessions only.





>

>  The fact that I am on 2 workshops is only self-disclosure.  It is by no means an imposition on others, since their commitments, in any event, were made much before Janis's email to workshop organizers, and must be honored. Like you, I don't see Janis's email of "1/3 max" as a hard and fast, where MAG members on workshops are concerned.





>

> I hope this settles the issue for all organizers and MAG members unless anyone has a different interpretation from what has been agreed here.

>

> Regards

>

> Virat Bhatia

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Igfmaglist mailing list

> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org

> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Evolintgov2014 mailing list

> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org

> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org





-- 
                     >> Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,          




Japan
www.anr.org



_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/975a4232/attachment.htm>

From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Sun Aug 10 10:18:48 2014
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 11:18:48 -0300
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Day Zero e-'book' release on the NETmundial
	roadmap
In-Reply-To: <B4A80103-F20B-461F-92D8-ADB7591FD194@gmail.com>
References: <B4A80103-F20B-461F-92D8-ADB7591FD194@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK01GyxhvmHDZRvxd9Yxba40b2vbsv45PkiJ6y2_TORyDQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for sharing Bill. It seems that the morning part of day 0 will be
organized by CGI.br, supported by the Brazilian government and will be
composed of multistakeholder panels followed by open discussions.

In the afternoon, I just would like to add that there will be a session
about the initial findings of a research being conducted on NETmndial by
APC, CTS/FGV and Diplo, as stated in the program you liked us too. We hope
to have a detailed schedule by next week.

Best,
Mar?lia


On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 7:17 AM, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi
>
> Marilyn asked me on the planning list for the ecosystem/IGF main session,
>
> I understand you are publishing an e-book and that is on Day 0. As you can
> share details about that event, I am sure that many of us will want to
> attend that session. It is of course, Day 0 but already a busy day!
>
>
> I was going to answer there but it might be that some others on the
> current and past MAGs would be interested, so: Yes, there?s a full-day
> event, the planning of which is still underway http://sched.co/1r7K8s3.
>  At present, I think the Brazilians will do panels in the morning looking
> back at NETmundial and maybe forward a bit, there will be release of the e-
> ?book? (it?s really just a big PDF), and then maybe there'll some
> discussion sessions?all TBD.  As to the book, texts are still coming in and
> anything could happen, so I don?t know if this is precisely what the final
> product will look like, but the working table of contents is below.
>
> Cheers
>
> Bill
>
> ?????
>
> *Beyond NETmundial: The Roadmap for Institutional Improvements to the
> Global Internet Governance Ecosystem*
>
> William J. Drake and Monroe Price, editors
>
>
> Introduction
> Monroe Price  (U. Pennsylvania)
>
> *I.  Overviews*
>
> 1. Evolving the Ecosystem
> William Drake  (U. Zurich)
>
> 2. The NETmundial: An Innovative First Step on a Long Road
> Joana Varon (Consultant,  Brazil)
>
> *II.  Strengthening the Internet Governance Forum *
>
> 3. A Perspective from the Technical Community
> Markus Kummer  (The Internet Society, Switzerland)
>
> 4. A Perspective from the Private Sector: Ensuring that Forum Follows
> Function
> Vint Cerf, Patrick Ryan, Max Senges, and Rick Whitt  (Google)
>
> 5. A Perspective from Civil Society
> Jeremy Malcolm (Electronic Frontier Foundation, USA)
>
> *III.  Filling the Gaps*
>
> 6.  Institutionalizing the Clearing House Function
> William Drake (U. Zurich)  & Lea Kaspar (Global Partners Digital, UK)
>
> 7.  Global Mechanisms to Support National and Regional Multistakeholderism
> Anriette Esterhuysen  (Association for Progressive Communications, South
> Africa)
>
> 8.  Feet on the Ground: Marco Civil as an Example of Multistakeholderism
> in Practice
> Ronaldo Lemos  (Institute for Technology and Society, State University of
> Rio de Janeiro, Brazil)
>
> 9.  Journeys Can be More important than the Destination:
> Reflecting on the CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation
> Samantha Dickinson  (Consultant, Australia)
>
> *IV.  Improving ICANN*
>
> 10.  The IANA Transfer
> Emma Llans?  and Matt Shears  (Center for Democracy and Technology, USA/UK)
>
> 11.  ICANN Globalization, Accountability, and Transparency
> Avri Doria  (Consultant, USA)
>
> *V.  Broader Analytical Perspectives*
>
> 12.  Towards Information Interdependence
> James Losey  (Stockholm University, Sweden)
>
> 13.  Towards Information Sovereignty
> Shawn Powers  (Georgia State University, USA)
>
> *VI.  Moving Forward*
>
> 14.  Creating a Global Internet Public Policy Space: Is there a Way
> Forward?
> Marilia Maciel  (Center for Technology and Society, Getulio Vargas
> Foundation,  Brazil)
>
> 15.  Stepping into the ?Beyond?
> Nnenna Nwakanma  (The World Wide Web Foundation, C?te d'Ivoire)
>
> 16.  NetMundial: Watershed in Internet Policy Making?
> Wolfgang Kleinw?chter  (University of Aarhus/Germany)
>
>
> ***********************************************
> William J. Drake
> International Fellow & Lecturer
>   Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
>   University of Zurich, Switzerland
> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency,
>   ICANN, www.ncuc.org
> william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists),
>   www.williamdrake.org
> ***********************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>


-- 
*Mar?lia Maciel*
Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio
Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law
School
http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts

DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu
PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/
Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" -
http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/3d2121e9/attachment.htm>

From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Sun Aug 10 10:29:28 2014
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 11:29:28 -0300
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
 template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF -
 Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <BAY406-EAS42187C8790FA441049D0AD8D3EC0@phx.gbl>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<D00D368B.37576%baher.esmat@icann.org>
	<BAY406-EAS42187C8790FA441049D0AD8D3EC0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK1sHDhZYrNSb6GfK+ya5j0+J3XGcyE9tQCRkMz5+62enA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

Thanks so much to all those who have been involved in the planning of this
session. It is very well shaped and it promises to be one of the key
sessions of the upcoming IGF.

Jumping in very late myself, my only suggestion would be that when
reviewing the list of speakers, remaining gaps are filled in a way that
actors from developing countries are more represented. It is excellent that
the session will be very interactive, but it is also important that the
line-up captures the diversity of views.

Congratulations again. Looking forward to this session.

Mar?lia


On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>
wrote:

> thanks, Baher, we are looking at all the main sessions, including Day 0,
> and assessing overlap and ALSO recognizing many who were invited initially
> did not accept. We are also assessing the gaps that may exist due to geo
> diversity and will continue to listen closely to the comments of our MAG
> colleagues and others who are participating on the Evolintgov list.
>
> Thanks for your comment.
>
> Marilyn and Subi
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Aug 10, 2014, at 8:05 AM, "Baher Esmat" <baher.esmat at icann.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks Subi and Marilyn for leading this effort.
>
> I can see from the latest draft submitted to the list that each panel has
> 10+ confirmed panelists plus 7 invited/TBC. Assuming half of those
> invited/TBC are confirmed, and despite a more balanced panel may result
> from adding them, we are going to have 90-min panel discussion with 13 to
> 15 panelists, which is quite a large number in my view.
>
> Best
> Baher
>
> On 8/10/14, 2:20 PM, "Subi Chaturvedi" <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are delighted
> to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th September, 2014.
>
> We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members and
> active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and made
> this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
> 1. Olga Cavalli
> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
> 4.Virat Bhatia
> 5.Ana Neves
> 6.Constance Bommelaer
> 7.Kossi Amessinou
> 8.Baher Esmat
> 9.Izumi Aizu
> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
> 11.William Drake
> 12.Jivan
> 13.Patrick Ryan
> 14.Ankhi Das
> 15.Christine Arida
> 16. Filiz
> 17. Paul Wilson
> 18. Mathew Shears
> 19. Jeanette Hoffman
> 20 Adam Peake
> 21. Markus Kummer
>
> We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has indeed
> benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy and
> freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts have
> been made to include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy
> questions.
>
> We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively
> engage with us.
>
> A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching this
> session in particular through a sustained engagement.
>
> Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and
> insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained committed
> to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some of them will
> lend us their considerable skills at the venue for substantive
> rapporteuring.
>
>
>
> warmest
>
> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
>
>  _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>


-- 
*Mar?lia Maciel*
Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio
Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law
School
http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts

DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu
PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/
Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" -
http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/c25dceb8/attachment.htm>

From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Sun Aug 10 12:43:42 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 12:43:42 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
 template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF -
 Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK1sHDhZYrNSb6GfK+ya5j0+J3XGcyE9tQCRkMz5+62enA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>,
	<D00D368B.37576%baher.esmat@icann.org>
	<BAY406-EAS42187C8790FA441049D0AD8D3EC0@phx.gbl>,
	<CACpVkK1sHDhZYrNSb6GfK+ya5j0+J3XGcyE9tQCRkMz5+62enA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY169-W105C61DE5DBC1922E56AFD7D3EC0@phx.gbl>

Mariela, thanks so much for your comments.Subi and I are in full agreement that we are examining how to fill in gaps. And greatly appreciate your comments. 
We want to examine the comments, and the options and provide a coherent suggestion to address, so do bear with us just a bit. 
However, I ask for some MAG help on a couple of items in the meantime: 
How to categorize a participant from a global entity: Categorizing global speakers who are with a UN organization or Regional organization, such as OECD, or NEPAD.  I would suggest that UN organization is global, and that OECD and NEPAD, for example, are Regional, as is Carribbean Telecom Organization, but am asking for feedback on that as a concept.  A global entity from business, such as ICC defines itself as global, as does WITSA.  Some CS organizations are also global in scope, while the staff reside in a particular country. 
I am just considering how to approach that in order to both assure voices from developing regions, and also to provide a platform for addressing the broader issues of how such entities fit into the global IG ecosystem.  
For instance, certainly UN organizations are global in focus :  UNESCO, CSTD/UNCTAD, UN DESA, ITU.  Some of the international entities/ organizations are global in focus, such as ICANN, IETF, ISOC. These are for illustration only.  
I wouldn't suggest that UNESCO is European, for instance, just because its offices are in Paris, France, or that ITU is Swiss.  Ditto to the RIRs who are obviously regional, even if the offices are in a particular country.  We haven't had this conversation and I am only striving to ensure that we are considering different players in the IG Ecosystem, and building an understanding with fellow MAG members. 
Analyzing the relevant Workshops: Some of the workshops are very relevant, to perhaps even directly aligned with this main session. The session on Emerging Issues will also be highly relevant to consider the way forward for IGF itself in addressing key challenges and its future evolution.  I am actually reading all of the workshops, and of course, taking into consideration the Day 0 events, including the HL event, and then also making a list of the frequent speakers in relevant workshops, as well, so that we can also take into account how and where the topics that are relevant into this main session are considered and who is being heard from, in various sessions. 
Other relevant thoughts:  Present Registration counts: In order to  assess the options for speakers,  I have also looked at the registered list for all groups, and it is quite interesting. And, given that so many of the names that one would expect to be here are not, I am a little perplexed. IGO:67Govs: 209Tech Comm: 154 Civil Society: 432Private Sector: 265Of course, registration count is still early.  BUT, several folks who are proposed for main sessions are not confirmed to attend.  I am wondering if actually all organizers of Workshops and Main sessions should send a reminder, quickly, to all invited speakers to remind them to register.   As this is reaching the full MAG list, just mentioning that it is good to check the lists to see if your participants are indeed registered. 
In summary,  I am just doing the gap analysis and Subi and I will be examining options.

Marilyn Cade
 



From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 11:29:28 -0300
Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
To: marilynscade at hotmail.com
CC: baher.esmat at icann.org; evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org; Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org

Dear all,
Thanks so much to all those who have been involved in the planning of this session. It is very well shaped and it promises to be one of the key sessions of the upcoming IGF. 



Jumping in very late myself, my only suggestion would be that when reviewing the list of speakers, remaining gaps are filled in a way that actors from developing countries are more represented. It is excellent that the session will be very interactive, but it is also important that the line-up captures the diversity of views.


Congratulations again. Looking forward to this session. 
Mar?lia

On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:


thanks, Baher, we are looking at all the main sessions, including Day 0, and assessing overlap and ALSO recognizing many who were invited initially did not accept. We are also assessing the gaps that may exist due to geo diversity and will continue to listen closely to the comments of our MAG colleagues and others who are participating on the Evolintgov list. 


Thanks for your comment.
Marilyn and Subi

Sent from my iPad
On Aug 10, 2014, at 8:05 AM, "Baher Esmat" <baher.esmat at icann.org> wrote:



Thanks Subi and Marilyn for leading this effort. 
I can see from the latest draft submitted to the list that each panel has 10+ confirmed panelists plus 7 invited/TBC. Assuming half of those invited/TBC are confirmed, and despite a more balanced panel may result from adding them, we are going to have 90-min panel discussion with 13 to 15 panelists, which is quite a large number in my view. 


BestBaher
On 8/10/14, 2:20 PM, "Subi Chaturvedi" <subichaturvedi at gmail.com> wrote:


Dear All,
Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are delighted to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th September, 2014.


We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members and active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and made this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :

1. Olga Cavalli

2.Anriette
 Esterhuyser3.Subi Chaturvedi

4.Virat Bhatia

5.Ana Neves

6.Constance
 Bommelaer7.Kossi Amessinou

8.Baher
 Esmat9.Izumi
 Aizu10.Shahram
 Soboutipour11.William
 Drake12.Jivan

13.Patrick
 Ryan14.Ankhi
 Das15.Christine
 Arida16. Filiz

17. Paul Wilson

18. Mathew Shears

19. Jeanette Hoffman

20 Adam Peake

21. Markus Kummer


We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has indeed benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy and freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts have been made to include all suggestions
 on format, speakers and policy questions. 
We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively engage with us.
A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching this session in particular through a sustained engagement.


Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained committed to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some of them will lend us their considerable skills
 at the venue for substantive rapporteuring.



warmest
Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade



_______________________________________________
Evolintgov2014 mailing list
Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org


http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org



_______________________________________________

Evolintgov2014 mailing list

Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org

http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org




-- 
Mar?lia MacielPesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio

Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School

http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts



DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu

PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/


Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en 



 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/d3e8a1cc/attachment.htm>

From jeanette at wzb.eu  Sun Aug 10 12:58:03 2014
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:58:03 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of
 Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial +
 CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>

Hi,

thank you for sharing your latest draft with this list, Subi and Marilyn.

In its current form this setup is not workable yet, imho. The first part 
has too many panelists and too many themes. I would suggest reducing the 
number of themes to two or three for a 90 min session.

The number of big names for this whole session seems overpowering to me. 
I don't see how a discussion between the panelists and the audience can 
be facilitated by moderators. If only third of these panelists decide to 
ignore the time restriction, the session will turn into a long and 
boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than once while 
moderating main sessions with important people...)

And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake proposed Samantha 
Dickinson and me as co-moderators. In the current draft, Samantha has 
got the role of a remote moderator while the co-organizers of this main 
session have included themselves as moderators. I find this a bit 
awkward and would prefer if the co-organizers would refrain from using 
their role to promote themselves for such tasks.

I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or impolite, this is 
really not my intention. However, at this late point in time I feel I 
have to be direct in my feedback.

Best, Jeanette



Am 10.08.14 13:20, schrieb Subi Chaturvedi:
> Dear All,
>
> Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are
> delighted to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th
> September, 2014.
>
> We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members
> and active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and
> made this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
> 1. Olga Cavalli
> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
> 4.Virat Bhatia
> 5.Ana Neves
> 6.Constance Bommelaer
> 7.Kossi Amessinou
> 8.Baher Esmat
> 9.Izumi Aizu
> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
> 11.William Drake
> 12.Jivan
> 13.Patrick Ryan
> 14.Ankhi Das
> 15.Christine Arida
> 16. Filiz
> 17. Paul Wilson
> 18. Mathew Shears
> 19. Jeanette Hoffman
> 20 Adam Peake
> 21. Markus Kummer
>
> We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has
> indeed benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy
> and freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts
> have been made to include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy
> questions.
>
> We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively
> engage with us.
>
> A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching
> this session in particular through a sustained engagement.
>
> Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and
> insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained
> committed to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some
> of them will lend us their considerable skills at the venue for
> substantive rapporteuring.
>
>
>
> warmest
>
> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>



From iza at anr.org  Sun Aug 10 18:12:32 2014
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:12:32 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
 template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF -
 Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <CAGuf3w-axt7n0vxyymUe2La=AP=YBFwiuSXmL+Ft4-YyD8WyRw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGuf3w-axt7n0vxyymUe2La=AP=YBFwiuSXmL+Ft4-YyD8WyRw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKizOPr9U5sgvQ_ciior5+t9JhEWC7yopfx4Cho1kM87aA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi, I very much support all the suggestions Veronica made as they allow all
participants including remote participants to proactively engage in the
substance more than "remote" participation which is still important but
rather shallow.

Perhaps we can form a small team and work it out.

Izumi

2014?8?11?????Veronica Cretu<veronicacretu at gmail.com>????????:

> Dear Subi and Marilyn, greetings and thank you for the wonderful draft of
> the Main Session Day 3.
>
> I just wanted to ask smth related to ways the audience can get actively
> engaged in the session given that I have not seen any specific ways
> participants in the room could be engaged, except for the opportunity to
> use the mic and address questions.
>
> I might be wrong about it (there might be a plan in place) ...  however, I
> will just highlight few ways you could look into (of course, if relevant
> per overall purpose of the session):
>
> *BEFORE:* couple of days before the session, a brief survey could made
> available online and also shared via social media to get participants'
> expectations from this session (any particular comments, questions, aspects
> they are keen to see being explored in addition to those already
> articulated in the draft); It is important to be flexible and take into
> account the needs and interests of the broader community in regards to this
> session.
> *DURING*:
> - twitting with a hash tag for the session;
> - use an online platform which could be used by anyone in the room (a wiki
> page, etc) and participants could either:
> 1. ask questions (address them to specific panelists) via this platform;
> 2. respond to the questions addressed to the panelists via this platform;
> - write in their comments/reflections on some flipcharts which might be
> spread around the room;
> *AFTER*: complete a short survey at the end of the session and thus
> either share their reflections or leave any Qs that might be interested in
> being explored in the future; It is important to continue building on this
> experience and explore participants' feedback.
>
> These are just my few comments on this session! Well done and best of
> luck!
>
> As ever,
> Veronica
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','subichaturvedi at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are delighted
>> to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th September, 2014.
>>
>> We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members
>> and active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and
>> made this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
>> 1. Olga Cavalli
>> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
>> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
>> 4.Virat Bhatia
>> 5.Ana Neves
>> 6.Constance Bommelaer
>> 7.Kossi Amessinou
>> 8.Baher Esmat
>> 9.Izumi Aizu
>> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
>> 11.William Drake
>> 12.Jivan
>> 13.Patrick Ryan
>> 14.Ankhi Das
>> 15.Christine Arida
>> 16. Filiz
>> 17. Paul Wilson
>> 18. Mathew Shears
>> 19. Jeanette Hoffman
>> 20 Adam Peake
>> 21. Markus Kummer
>>
>> We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has
>> indeed benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy and
>> freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts have
>> been made to include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy
>> questions.
>>
>> We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively
>> engage with us.
>>
>> A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching this
>> session in particular through a sustained engagement.
>>
>> Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and
>> insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained committed
>> to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some of them will
>> lend us their considerable skills at the venue for substantive
>> rapporteuring.
>>
>>
>>
>> warmest
>>
>> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org');>
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Veronica Cretu *
>
>
> *President, Open Government Institute**Republic of Moldova
> - http://opengov.si.md/ <http://opengov.si.md/>*
>
> *Member of the Steering Committee, *
> *Open Government Partnership (OGP);*
> *http://www.opengovpartnership.org/about/steering-committee/role-and-current-membership
> <http://www.opengovpartnership.org/about/steering-committee/role-and-current-membership>*
>
> *Member of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group*
> *To the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)*
>
> *http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/1549
> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/>*
>
> *Member of the Nominating Committee of ICANN*
> *(Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbering)*
>
> *http://www.icann.org/en/groups/nomcom/2014/members <http://www.icann.org>*
>
>
>
> *Email: veronicacretu at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','veronicacretu at gmail.com');> and/or
> veronica at cretu.md <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','veronica at cretu.md');>
> Skype: veronicacretu Phone: 373 067435000*
>


-- 
                     >> Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
Japan
www.anr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140811/72910d87/attachment.htm>

From iza at anr.org  Sun Aug 10 18:13:46 2014
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:13:46 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Query: IGF Main Session -
 Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <BAY169-W134763760D6E0ED7629A9D0D3EC0@phx.gbl>
References: <CANRKRpJr--n4iszFq70xeO0ZWS8u-229LCyEoNfewFQHp9inzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E4B717.7030408@wzb.eu>
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F15@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
	<84632B3F-AB1C-4527-9179-28D648B357A7@gmail.com>
	<3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5440F7C@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>
	<CA+YNoKhBrvB+d6kQ6aGVBdm1a9CZKJ87D3S-Crd-vB3yVy8MEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpJVeEFQyko77y5YGC5VkNVKqtFhLQfhagayb0A2vRZthg@mail.gmail.com>
	<FB0D3110-8ADE-41A2-9CFE-CC15E8631D04@glocom.ac.jp>
	<CA+YNoKjOFnd-fUOE_sLoPgimtnc34UPNM1Y1Lrh=P7fvqZa=PA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BAY169-W134763760D6E0ED7629A9D0D3EC0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKinR2D6UCTK8VaPpebD-kf1jFsxZQdnjUg5d4K_bhC_8w@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you for your further consideration and rebalancing efforts.

Izumi

2014?8?10?????Marilyn Cade<marilynscade at hotmail.com>????????:

>
>  Thanks, Izumi. this is helpful and we will take a look at the geographic
> diversity and also some names that may be coming in from others from the
> region and address this in more detail.
>
> Your comments are appreciated.
>
> Re the reference to the Japanese 'team', I think that was a reference to
> the excellent report provided by Kyoto University Professor into CSTD WG
> EC, but Subi and I have agreed that is not suited to this session.
>
> Nevertheless, it was a substantive contribution into the CSTD WG EC, and
> for anyone interested off list, I am sure I can obtain the link to share,
> just as background.
>
>
>  Marilyn and Subi
> ------------------------------
> From: iza at anr.org <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','iza at anr.org');>
> Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 22:16:53 +0900
> To: subichaturvedi at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','subichaturvedi at gmail.com');>
> CC: Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org');>;
> evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org');>
> Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] [Evolintgov2014] Query: IGF Main Session -
> Evolution of IG Ecosystem-Update
>
> Here are the contacts:
>
> Edmon Chung <edmon at dotasia.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','edmon at dotasia.org');>> or Edmon Chung <
> edmon at afilias.info <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','edmon at afilias.info');>>
>
> Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore), tphang <TPHANG at ntu.edu.sg
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','TPHANG at ntu.edu.sg');>>
>
> Hong Xue (China), Hong Xue <hongxueipr at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','hongxueipr at gmail.com');>>
>
> Am not sure who you meant for Japanese team, are they you mean from the
> Ministry of Communications? I guess there are enough from govs already.
>
> izumi
>
>
>
> 2014-08-09 21:14 GMT+09:00 Adam <ajp at glocom.ac.jp
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ajp at glocom.ac.jp');>>:
>
> Hi Subi, comment below:
>
>
> On Aug 9, 2014, at 2:55 PM, Subi Chaturvedi wrote:
>
> > Izumi better late than never :) Though the list has been updated. But
> you have made some excellent suggestions here.
> >
> > Have responded inline below.
> >
> > On 9 August 2014 08:57, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','iza at anr.org');>> wrote:
> > Very sorry for this very late intervention.
> >
> > Looking at the list of names below, I see very few people from Asia and
> Pacific, especially East Asia, South East Asia and South Asia as well as
> Pacific Islands.
> >
> > I see no Chinese or Indian, considering the user population, it is
> better to include them.
> >
> >
> > For Government, only Mohammed Al Qurashi (KSA) - from Saudi Arabia which
> is
> > more of Middle East than Asia Pacific.
> >
> > I would suggest someone from any other Asian countries - say China, Hong
> Kong, Korea, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia etc.
> >  Dr. Govind (India) - just hosted APrIGF in Delhi - will be very good.:
> >
> > Dr. Govind has been invited. In both his capacities as the organiser of
> APrIGF , the CEO of NIXI and following up on Anriette suggestion of
> including some host country government reps. India hosted the IGF in 2008
> in Hyderabad and Dr. Govind was the nodal officer for it. We have also been
> provided a Chair and a speaker for this session from the host country. It
> would be good to have two minute interventions from the some of the other
> host countries as well. Indonesia, Azerbaijan and others on the value that
> IGF has created for and in the host countries, inline with Janis's larger
> call.
> >
> > Amongst Private Sector, Technical Community and Civil Society, I see
> > Zahid from Pakistan, Geoff Huston from Australia and Adam Peake
> (Japan/UK).
> >
> > Bill had suggested Jeremy or Adam Peake from CS. Jeremy has responded in
> the affirmative Adam is yet to respond.
> >
>
>
> I've replied a couple of times,
>
> On Jul 23, 2014, at 4:55 PM, Adam wrote:
>
> > Is there a current outline of the session and topics to be discussed.
>  Looked through the list archives and nothing stood out <
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/>
> >
> > If there is a NETmundial focus then I'd be happy to contribute.
> >
> > Adam
> >
>
>
> and yesterday:
>
>
> On Aug 8, 2014, at 6:39 PM, Adam wrote:
>
> > Thanks Bill.
> >
> > I'd be happy to help out, contribute if I can -- have some idea of
> WSIS/IGF/NETmundial.
> >
> > But person I'd personally like to hear from is Marilaia Maciel.  She's
> been following most of the relevant activities, and very involved in
> coordinating the roadmap section of the NETmundial document (I spent more
> time on principles.)  I think there's been some misunderstanding about
> NETmundial's suggestions regarding the IGF, and she may put those straight.
> >
> > Adam
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>
> > I am not opposing to any single individuals at all, but having them all
> three
> > seem too Caucasian oriented, (sorry to bring this), no Oriental or Asian
> or Pacific
> > people there.
> >
> > We have good candidates here again, people like:
> >
> > Edmon Chung (Hong Kong), Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore), Hong Xue (China),
> > Ram Mohan (India), Rajesh Chharia (India), Rajnesh D Singh, (Fiji),
> Hongbin Chu, (China), Anja Kovacs (India) YJ Park (korea).
> >
> > We have some good names from CS now.
> >
> > I did ask around for the Japanese team which made an excellent
> presentation at the WGEC meeting in which they did a comprehensive 8 year
> evaluation of IGF. They would make for an excellent intervention in this
> session. Would be grateful if you can connect us with them.
> >
> > We want the panel to be balanced, relevant and diverse.
> >
> > Also a connect with Prof. Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore) would also be great.
> >
> > We're trying to not repeat people from the same networks and
> organisations.
> >
> > Thanks again for your input. Sending the updated draft shortly. An early
> response from you would be much appreciated.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Subi
> >
> >
> >
> > Again sorry for this belated response, but I hope some of the factors be
> included.
> >
> > I didn't put any Japanese as I don't want to make this a kind of selfish
> intervention, but there are also good candidates from Japan ;-)
> >
> > izumi
> >
> >> rally leaving off MAG members for now):
> >>
> >> Government/IGO:
> >>      . Neelie Kroes, EC [confirmed (Subi).for which panel?]
> >>      . Rafa? Trzaskowski (Poland, confirmed availability to Igor.for
> panel 1?)
> >>      . Robert Shlegel (Russia, MAG, confirms himself)
> >>      . Norberto Berner (Argentina)
> >>      . Benedicto Fonseca (Brazil)
> >>      . Larry Strickling (US)
> >>      . Ed Vaizy (UK)
> >>      . Mohammed AlQurashi (KSA)
> >>      . Alice Munyua (AU)
> >> Private Sector:
> >>      . Danil Kerimi (WEF)
> >>      . Philipp Grabensee (Affilias)
> >>      . Zahid Jamil (Jamil & Jamil)
> >>      . Phil Rushton (BT)
> >>      . Jimson Olufuye (WITSA)
> >> Technical Community:
> >>      . Jari Arkko (IETF)
> >>      . Tim Berners Lee (W3C)
> >>      . Virgilio Almeida (Brazil/NM)
> >>      . Byron Holland (CIRA)
> >>      . Geoff Huston (APNIC)
> >>      . Adiel Akplogan (AFRINIC)
> >> Civil Society:
> >>      . Jeremy Malcolm (EFF)
> >>      . Stephanie Perrin (UT)
> >>      . Wolfgang Kleinw?chter (ICANN)
> >>      . Nnenna Nwakanma (WWWF)
> >>      . Jovan Kurbalija (Diplo)
> >>      . Ron Deibert (Citizen Lab)
> >>      . Marilia Maciel (FGV)
> >>      . Adam Peake (Glocom)
> >
> >
> > 2014-08-08 22:42 GMT+09:00 Bhatia, Virat <virat.bhatia at intl.att.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','virat.bhatia at intl.att.com');>>:
> > Hi Bill,
> >
> > From everything you have mentioned, we are in complete agreement.
> >
> > Let me explain.
> >
> > MAG members on main session
> >
> > (i)      My comments are purely aimed at responding to the questions
> raised by Subi in her email "regarding serving MAG members as panelists on
> a main session" to which Jeanette provided a response, and Subi
> acknowledged, seeking comments to "refresh memory".  I guess she is trying
> to decide on whether or not MAG members can accept a speaking / moderator
> roles on the main session she is helping to organize.
> >
> >
> >
> > (ii)    On the issue of main sessions, Janis, you, I and I believe
> everyone, agreed to keep the limit to 1 for 2014 IGF, based on his email of
> July 24, which you have quoted below. There is no quarrel on that issue. In
> fact your email quoting Janis reinforces my point and gives clear guidance
> for the organizers of main sessions.
> >
> >
> >
> > MAG members on workshops
> >
> > I have neither mentioned in my email,  nor wish by any means, to
> recommend that MAG members, who have accepted speaker roles for 3-4 or in
> some cases, even 5 workshops, should decline at this stage.  That would be
> terrible for the organizers of those workshops.  My point was limited to
> responding to the query about MAG members on main sessions only.
> >
> >  The fact that I am on 2 workshops is only self-disclosure.  It is by no
> means an imposition on others, since their commitments, in any event, were
> made much before Janis's email to workshop organizers, and must be honored.
> Like you, I don't see Janis's email of "1/3 max" as a hard and fast, where
> MAG members on workshops are concerned.
> >
> > I hope this settles the issue for all organizers and MAG members unless
> anyone has a different interpretation from what has been agreed here.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Virat Bhatia
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Igfmaglist mailing list
> > Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org');>
> > http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> > Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org');>
> >
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>
>
>
> --
>                      >> Izumi Aizu <<
> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
> Japan
> www.anr.org
>
> _______________________________________________ Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org');>
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>


-- 
                     >> Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
Japan
www.anr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140811/2a4d0d64/attachment.htm>

From iza at anr.org  Sun Aug 10 18:21:25 2014
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:21:25 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG
	Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpKcLctdiK6aMm7rF07E5=XPL4jGmBV8xyeoLGu2A5AKrw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS41642B63EE55F79099EC234D3EF0@phx.gbl>
	<CA+YNoKg5XRxdpG2NooEjVPjOaGWa5Ny5MhtLtacDQc9-UBViEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRp+kvq2CgRnG29ahKAp+pXhMbQAf2+6j1L-0hzt56YsDPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+YNoKgf2TqJY2SxWHB-xAp8-hrf1nW9+wGAjsKwJOxdvcE_vg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRp+Gq71E3er7=trspVe2jrb_gOZGdX83KC1KzUAZD3p3DA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpKcLctdiK6aMm7rF07E5=XPL4jGmBV8xyeoLGu2A5AKrw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKgnDpw3-EG2gJ2MF33OKA9MSAcZX2XqQ6fQkctOPG2gqw@mail.gmail.com>

Yes I did receive it.
As I suggested, using simple online sharing tool such as EtherPad or Google
Doc may help share the ongoing documents on real time basis. Worth to
consider.

Izumi
2014?8?10?????Subi Chaturvedi<subichaturvedi at gmail.com>????????:

> Could you confirm if you have received it Izumi.
>
> Tried posting it multiple times. I have received a note which says that
> the message is awaiting the approval of the moderator of the list before
> being posted due to the mail box size limit.
>
> Would be grateful if you could confirm whether it has indeed gone through,
>
> warmest
>
> Subi
> ----
>
> On 10 August 2014 16:30, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','subichaturvedi at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> It is no secret. Quite the contrary Izumi. It is a simply a reflections
>> of inputs from the MAG and the community. But as all different facilitators
>> have been coordinating between them for all the other main sessions,
>>  wanted to maintain the same format across all the mains.
>>
>> Anyway the draft is online now.
>>
>> Thanks again for your efforts and inputs.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Subi
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10 August 2014 16:23, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','iza at anr.org');>> wrote:
>>
>>> Whether it's "ready" or not show the draft now, please. I don't
>>> understand why you need extra process before showing that.
>>> Any secret? That itself is very much troublesome.
>>>
>>> Izumi
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014?8?10?????Subi Chaturvedi<subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','subichaturvedi at gmail.com');>>????????:
>>>
>>> The draft is indeed ready Izumi. And I thank you yet again for all the
>>>> inputs you have provided to get us here.
>>>>
>>>> Just awaiting a final read from the co-leads. Will be sharing it
>>>> anytime now.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you all for your inputs and suggestions.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Subi
>>>>
>>>> On 10 Aug 2014 04:16, "Izumi AIZU" <iza at anr.org> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 2014-08-10 2:10 GMT+09:00 Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Bill, as the co organizer with Subi, I appreciate your input.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Actually, I think that Subi and I have a widely representative
>>>> approach.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Let us present our draft as co-organizers;
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Your input and others have been listened to.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Where is the latest draft?  Could you put it to some shareable space
>>>> such
>>>> > as EtherPad or Google Doc or something like that?  That makes our
>>>> life much
>>>> > easier to keep updated.
>>>> >
>>>> > izumi
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>> > Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>> >
>>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>                      >> Izumi Aizu <<
>>> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
>>> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
>>> Japan
>>> www.anr.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>

-- 
                     >> Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
Japan
www.anr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140811/6fae24df/attachment.htm>

From iza at anr.org  Sun Aug 10 18:31:51 2014
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:31:51 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] IGF Main Session - Evolution of IG
	Ecosystem-Update
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpKcLctdiK6aMm7rF07E5=XPL4jGmBV8xyeoLGu2A5AKrw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B814C2-47CB-4493-9909-6BCF189BF703@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+CYHxO1C5SKBFo2fS7cfp3zYUndD+JiCu8fyB_AWdQmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<7FDF3A8D-03BE-4828-9A70-89406AF4BEF1@ostrowski.waw.pl>
	<CANRKRp+tFzJpzdz0aMD8DY+HuM3tyDOtxBY+-fP088jZ55Ej9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<AE4BE492-A5F2-4591-AF09-F414B9305189@gmail.com>
	<53E35C2F.4080200@apc.org> <53E362EB.8080809@acm.org>
	<F16A3868-871D-423E-9FA3-C36704C53336@gmail.com>
	<53E368B6.9090609@apc.org> <53E36A62.1090004@wzb.eu>
	<53E36FF6.8060904@cdt.org>
	<aac59e9f-0540-4f09-8d21-8e0851fedef0@email.android.com>
	<73F4CEEF-0682-476F-9703-CDFB70F1B8E8@gmail.com>
	<53E399D6.2000608@wzb.eu>
	<6394F1F4-B4A9-473D-8CBC-6B7A18E2293A@gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpLgKjZCpJpXQGALe593oXCjRZ+n1rgvTzjwnTfzs4SVLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E46FC3.9040501@wzb.eu>
	<CANRKRpJ4_NWgbnKdEK4UbaqEzhH5tj+7xOGt2D8zwpFirMcTkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<B299B556-2753-4501-BC77-5B50144035DF@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS41642B63EE55F79099EC234D3EF0@phx.gbl>
	<CA+YNoKg5XRxdpG2NooEjVPjOaGWa5Ny5MhtLtacDQc9-UBViEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRp+kvq2CgRnG29ahKAp+pXhMbQAf2+6j1L-0hzt56YsDPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+YNoKgf2TqJY2SxWHB-xAp8-hrf1nW9+wGAjsKwJOxdvcE_vg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRp+Gq71E3er7=trspVe2jrb_gOZGdX83KC1KzUAZD3p3DA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANRKRpKcLctdiK6aMm7rF07E5=XPL4jGmBV8xyeoLGu2A5AKrw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKhTXE1DxTfbh4VHxs-3j=8bcC9L7s9j=tFuS4W9wWzDuw@mail.gmail.com>

Yes I did receive it.
As I suggested, using simple online sharing tool such as EtherPad or Google
Doc may help share the ongoing documents on real time basis. Worth to
consider.

Izumi
2014?8?10?????Subi Chaturvedi<subichaturvedi at gmail.com>????????:

> Could you confirm if you have received it Izumi.
>
> Tried posting it multiple times. I have received a note which says that
> the message is awaiting the approval of the moderator of the list before
> being posted due to the mail box size limit.
>
> Would be grateful if you could confirm whether it has indeed gone through,
>
> warmest
>
> Subi
> ----
>
> On 10 August 2014 16:30, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','subichaturvedi at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> It is no secret. Quite the contrary Izumi. It is a simply a reflections
>> of inputs from the MAG and the community. But as all different facilitators
>> have been coordinating between them for all the other main sessions,
>>  wanted to maintain the same format across all the mains.
>>
>> Anyway the draft is online now.
>>
>> Thanks again for your efforts and inputs.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Subi
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10 August 2014 16:23, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','iza at anr.org');>> wrote:
>>
>>> Whether it's "ready" or not show the draft now, please. I don't
>>> understand why you need extra process before showing that.
>>> Any secret? That itself is very much troublesome.
>>>
>>> Izumi
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014?8?10?????Subi Chaturvedi<subichaturvedi at gmail.com
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','subichaturvedi at gmail.com');>>????????:
>>>
>>> The draft is indeed ready Izumi. And I thank you yet again for all the
>>>> inputs you have provided to get us here.
>>>>
>>>> Just awaiting a final read from the co-leads. Will be sharing it
>>>> anytime now.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you all for your inputs and suggestions.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Subi
>>>>
>>>> On 10 Aug 2014 04:16, "Izumi AIZU" <iza at anr.org> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 2014-08-10 2:10 GMT+09:00 Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Bill, as the co organizer with Subi, I appreciate your input.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Actually, I think that Subi and I have a widely representative
>>>> approach.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Let us present our draft as co-organizers;
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Your input and others have been listened to.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Where is the latest draft?  Could you put it to some shareable space
>>>> such
>>>> > as EtherPad or Google Doc or something like that?  That makes our
>>>> life much
>>>> > easier to keep updated.
>>>> >
>>>> > izumi
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>> > Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>> >
>>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>                      >> Izumi Aizu <<
>>> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
>>> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
>>> Japan
>>> www.anr.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>

-- 
                     >> Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
Japan
www.anr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140811/e88264ab/attachment.htm>

From veronicacretu at gmail.com  Sun Aug 10 16:04:31 2014
From: veronicacretu at gmail.com (Veronica Cretu)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 23:04:31 +0300
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
 template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF -
 Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGuf3w-axt7n0vxyymUe2La=AP=YBFwiuSXmL+Ft4-YyD8WyRw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Subi and Marilyn, greetings and thank you for the wonderful draft of
the Main Session Day 3.

I just wanted to ask smth related to ways the audience can get actively
engaged in the session given that I have not seen any specific ways
participants in the room could be engaged, except for the opportunity to
use the mic and address questions.

I might be wrong about it (there might be a plan in place) ...  however, I
will just highlight few ways you could look into (of course, if relevant
per overall purpose of the session):

*BEFORE:* couple of days before the session, a brief survey could made
available online and also shared via social media to get participants'
expectations from this session (any particular comments, questions, aspects
they are keen to see being explored in addition to those already
articulated in the draft); It is important to be flexible and take into
account the needs and interests of the broader community in regards to this
session.
*DURING*:
- twitting with a hash tag for the session;
- use an online platform which could be used by anyone in the room (a wiki
page, etc) and participants could either:
1. ask questions (address them to specific panelists) via this platform;
2. respond to the questions addressed to the panelists via this platform;
- write in their comments/reflections on some flipcharts which might be
spread around the room;
*AFTER*: complete a short survey at the end of the session and thus either
share their reflections or leave any Qs that might be interested in being
explored in the future; It is important to continue building on this
experience and explore participants' feedback.

These are just my few comments on this session! Well done and best of luck!


As ever,
Veronica



On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are delighted
> to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th September, 2014.
>
> We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members and
> active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and made
> this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
> 1. Olga Cavalli
> 2.Anriette Esterhuyser
> 3.Subi Chaturvedi
> 4.Virat Bhatia
> 5.Ana Neves
> 6.Constance Bommelaer
> 7.Kossi Amessinou
> 8.Baher Esmat
> 9.Izumi Aizu
> 10.Shahram Soboutipour
> 11.William Drake
> 12.Jivan
> 13.Patrick Ryan
> 14.Ankhi Das
> 15.Christine Arida
> 16. Filiz
> 17. Paul Wilson
> 18. Mathew Shears
> 19. Jeanette Hoffman
> 20 Adam Peake
> 21. Markus Kummer
>
> We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has indeed
> benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy and
> freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts have
> been made to include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy
> questions.
>
> We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively
> engage with us.
>
> A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching this
> session in particular through a sustained engagement.
>
> Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and
> insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained committed
> to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some of them will
> lend us their considerable skills at the venue for substantive
> rapporteuring.
>
>
>
> warmest
>
> Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>


-- 
*Veronica Cretu *


*President, Open Government Institute**Republic of Moldova
- http://opengov.si.md/ <http://opengov.si.md/>*

*Member of the Steering Committee, *
*Open Government Partnership (OGP);*
*http://www.opengovpartnership.org/about/steering-committee/role-and-current-membership
<http://www.opengovpartnership.org/about/steering-committee/role-and-current-membership>*

*Member of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group*
*To the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)*

*http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/1549
<http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/>*

*Member of the Nominating Committee of ICANN*
*(Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbering)*

*http://www.icann.org/en/groups/nomcom/2014/members <http://www.icann.org>*



*Email: veronicacretu at gmail.com <veronicacretu at gmail.com> and/or
veronica at cretu.md <veronica at cretu.md>Skype: veronicacretu Phone: 373
067435000*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140810/c90e4126/attachment.htm>

From virat.bhatia at intl.att.com  Mon Aug 11 04:57:30 2014
From: virat.bhatia at intl.att.com (Bhatia, Virat)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:27:30 +0530
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
 template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF -
 Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <CAGuf3w-axt7n0vxyymUe2La=AP=YBFwiuSXmL+Ft4-YyD8WyRw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGuf3w-axt7n0vxyymUe2La=AP=YBFwiuSXmL+Ft4-YyD8WyRw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3E89458219FCF547AC3CC2DC63611E7FC5441439@INBLUMSX03.ap.att.com>

Dear Veronica,
Many thanks for the great ideas here.
In line with the thought of crowd sourcing, before the session, remote discussions during the sessions and summary readouts after the sessions, I suppose it would be okay to use social media such as Facebook, etc., to get the awareness and engagement going, around the main sessions.
If MAG members have any ideas on what can go on such a Facebook page -  before, during and after the sessions - in addition to some excellent thoughts lined up by Veronica, please do write in.  The more the merrier.
Warm Regards
Virat Bhatia







From: Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Veronica Cretu
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2014 1:35 AM
To: Subi Chaturvedi
Cc: MAG List IGF; evolintgov2014
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF

Dear Subi and Marilyn, greetings and thank you for the wonderful draft of the Main Session Day 3.

I just wanted to ask smth related to ways the audience can get actively engaged in the session given that I have not seen any specific ways participants in the room could be engaged, except for the opportunity to use the mic and address questions.

I might be wrong about it (there might be a plan in place) ...  however, I will just highlight few ways you could look into (of course, if relevant per overall purpose of the session):

BEFORE: couple of days before the session, a brief survey could made available online and also shared via social media to get participants' expectations from this session (any particular comments, questions, aspects they are keen to see being explored in addition to those already articulated in the draft); It is important to be flexible and take into account the needs and interests of the broader community in regards to this session.
DURING:
- twitting with a hash tag for the session;
- use an online platform which could be used by anyone in the room (a wiki page, etc) and participants could either:
1. ask questions (address them to specific panelists) via this platform;
2. respond to the questions addressed to the panelists via this platform;
- write in their comments/reflections on some flipcharts which might be spread around the room;
AFTER: complete a short survey at the end of the session and thus either share their reflections or leave any Qs that might be interested in being explored in the future; It is important to continue building on this experience and explore participants' feedback.

These are just my few comments on this session! Well done and best of luck!

As ever,
Veronica


On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear All,

Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are delighted to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th September, 2014.

We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG members and active members from the community, who gave freely of their time and made this exercise productive and meaningful. A big should out for :
1. Olga Cavalli
2.Anriette Esterhuyser
3.Subi Chaturvedi
4.Virat Bhatia
5.Ana Neves
6.Constance Bommelaer
7.Kossi Amessinou
8.Baher Esmat
9.Izumi Aizu
10.Shahram Soboutipour
11.William Drake
12.Jivan
13.Patrick Ryan
14.Ankhi Das
15.Christine Arida
16. Filiz
17. Paul Wilson
18. Mathew Shears
19. Jeanette Hoffman
20 Adam Peake
21. Markus Kummer

We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has indeed benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the energy and freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All possible attempts have been made to include all suggestions on format, speakers and policy questions.

We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and actively engage with us.

A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching this session in particular through a sustained engagement.

Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support and insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained committed to the session over the past several months. Also hoping some of them will lend us their considerable skills at the venue for substantive rapporteuring.



warmest

Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade


_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org



--
Veronica Cretu

President, Open Government Institute
Republic of Moldova - http://opengov.si.md/

Member of the Steering Committee,
Open Government Partnership (OGP);
http://www.opengovpartnership.org/about/steering-committee/role-and-current-membership

Member of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group
To the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)
http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/1549
<http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/>

Member of the Nominating Committee of ICANN
(Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbering)
http://www.icann.org/en/groups/nomcom/2014/members
<http://www.icann.org>

Email: veronicacretu at gmail.com<mailto:veronicacretu at gmail.com> and/or veronica at cretu.md<mailto:veronica at cretu.md>
Skype: veronicacretu
Phone: 373 067435000
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140811/f54c79c0/attachment.htm>

From avri at acm.org  Mon Aug 11 07:53:09 2014
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:53:09 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
 template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF -
 Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <CAGuf3w-axt7n0vxyymUe2La=AP=YBFwiuSXmL+Ft4-YyD8WyRw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGuf3w-axt7n0vxyymUe2La=AP=YBFwiuSXmL+Ft4-YyD8WyRw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53E8AEA5.5020201@acm.org>

Hi,

Very happy about someone mentioning the idea of getting the rest of the
people in the room involved in the discussion.

Personally I object a bit to the notion of an 'audience', i think we
should be calling, and thinking of them as participants from the day we
start planning a session. Really form the time we start planning the
meeting, but that is MAG program committee issue and beyond the scope of
this list.

I think we miss the point of IGF sessions when we don't think of
ourselves as having 2 types of participant.

Those on the dais
Those in the house.

And for those in the house, on the floor, in the room, or on line,
audience is just the wrong way to think of them.

> (of course, if
> relevant per overall purpose of the session):

I think it is alwasy relevant of every session.  We are, as some say,
becoming more of a passive 'listen to the elders speak' sort of event.

I support the suggestions in this note.

avri


On 10-Aug-14 16:04, Veronica Cretu wrote:
> Dear Subi and Marilyn, greetings and thank you for the wonderful draft
> of the Main Session Day 3. 
> 
> I just wanted to ask smth related to ways the audience can get actively
> engaged in the session given that I have not seen any specific ways
> participants in the room could be engaged, except for the opportunity to
> use the mic and address questions. 
> 
> I might be wrong about it (there might be a plan in place) ...  however,
> I will just highlight few ways you could look into (of course, if
> relevant per overall purpose of the session):
> 
> *BEFORE:* couple of days before the session, a brief survey could made
> available online and also shared via social media to get participants'
> expectations from this session (any particular comments, questions,
> aspects they are keen to see being explored in addition to those already
> articulated in the draft); It is important to be flexible and take into
> account the needs and interests of the broader community in regards to
> this session. 
> *DURING*:
> - twitting with a hash tag for the session;
> - use an online platform which could be used by anyone in the room (a
> wiki page, etc) and participants could either:
> 1. ask questions (address them to specific panelists) via this platform;
> 2. respond to the questions addressed to the panelists via this platform;
> - write in their comments/reflections on some flipcharts which might be
> spread around the room;
> *AFTER*: complete a short survey at the end of the session and thus
> either share their reflections or leave any Qs that might be interested
> in being explored in the future; It is important to continue building on
> this experience and explore participants' feedback. 
> 
> These are just my few comments on this session! Well done and best of
> luck!  
> 
> As ever,
> Veronica
>        
> 
> 
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
> <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Dear All,
> 
>     Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are
>     delighted to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th
>     September, 2014.
> 
>     We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG
>     members and active members from the community, who gave freely of
>     their time and made this exercise productive and meaningful. A big
>     should out for :
>     1. Olga Cavalli
>     2.Anriette Esterhuyser
>     3.Subi Chaturvedi
>     4.Virat Bhatia
>     5.Ana Neves
>     6.Constance Bommelaer
>     7.Kossi Amessinou
>     8.Baher Esmat
>     9.Izumi Aizu
>     10.Shahram Soboutipour
>     11.William Drake
>     12.Jivan
>     13.Patrick Ryan
>     14.Ankhi Das
>     15.Christine Arida
>     16. Filiz
>     17. Paul Wilson
>     18. Mathew Shears
>     19. Jeanette Hoffman
>     20 Adam Peake
>     21. Markus Kummer
> 
>     We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has
>     indeed benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the
>     energy and freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All
>     possible attempts have been made to include all suggestions on
>     format, speakers and policy questions. 
> 
>     We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and
>     actively engage with us.
> 
>     A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching
>     this session in particular through a sustained engagement.
> 
>     Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support
>     and insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained
>     committed to the session over the past several months. Also hoping
>     some of them will lend us their considerable skills at the venue for
>     substantive rapporteuring.
> 
> 
> 
>     warmest
> 
>     Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Igfmaglist mailing list
>     Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>     http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> */Veronica Cretu /*
> */
> /**/President, Open Government Institute
> /**/Republic of Moldova - _http://opengov.si.md/_/*
> 
> /*Member of the Steering Committee, */
> /*Open Government Partnership (OGP);*/
> */_http://www.opengovpartnership.org/about/steering-committee/role-and-current-membership_/*
> 
> /*Member of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group*/
> /*To the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)*/
> /*http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/1549
> <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/>*/
> 
> /*Member of the Nominating Committee of ICANN*/
> /*(Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbering)*/
> /*http://www.icann.org/en/groups/nomcom/2014/members
> <http://www.icann.org>*/
> 
> */Email: veronicacretu at gmail.com <mailto:veronicacretu at gmail.com> and/or
> veronica at cretu.md <mailto:veronica at cretu.md>
> Skype: veronicacretu
> Phone: 373 067435000/*
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
> 



From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 11 08:09:34 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 08:09:34 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
 template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF -
 Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <53E8AEA5.5020201@acm.org>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>,
	<CAGuf3w-axt7n0vxyymUe2La=AP=YBFwiuSXmL+Ft4-YyD8WyRw@mail.gmail.com>,
	<53E8AEA5.5020201@acm.org>
Message-ID: <BAY169-W24965DA354A9D86F2F61A3D3ED0@phx.gbl>

Avri has of course, a key point that I think we all suppport -- actually, we want to think of the entire room as participants, which was the effort in trying to set up the room as a Town Hall. Not sure how that will evolve, given space. 
Re your comments, Veronica,  very useful to not just this session, but all of the sessions.  
Let's see what we can achieve. For instance, at least, In the room, we could distribute a comment sheet that participants could write comments on, in addition to having a hashtag, so that those in the room without online access can also provide comments, in addition to the remote participants.  With the Remote Participation perhaps augmented by someone specifically following the twitter comments. 


Marilyn 

> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:53:09 -0400
> From: avri at acm.org
> To: evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Very happy about someone mentioning the idea of getting the rest of the
> people in the room involved in the discussion.
> 
> Personally I object a bit to the notion of an 'audience', i think we
> should be calling, and thinking of them as participants from the day we
> start planning a session. Really form the time we start planning the
> meeting, but that is MAG program committee issue and beyond the scope of
> this list.
> 
> I think we miss the point of IGF sessions when we don't think of
> ourselves as having 2 types of participant.
> 
> Those on the dais
> Those in the house.
> 
> And for those in the house, on the floor, in the room, or on line,
> audience is just the wrong way to think of them.
> 
> > (of course, if
> > relevant per overall purpose of the session):
> 
> I think it is alwasy relevant of every session.  We are, as some say,
> becoming more of a passive 'listen to the elders speak' sort of event.
> 
> I support the suggestions in this note.
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> On 10-Aug-14 16:04, Veronica Cretu wrote:
> > Dear Subi and Marilyn, greetings and thank you for the wonderful draft
> > of the Main Session Day 3. 
> > 
> > I just wanted to ask smth related to ways the audience can get actively
> > engaged in the session given that I have not seen any specific ways
> > participants in the room could be engaged, except for the opportunity to
> > use the mic and address questions. 
> > 
> > I might be wrong about it (there might be a plan in place) ...  however,
> > I will just highlight few ways you could look into (of course, if
> > relevant per overall purpose of the session):
> > 
> > *BEFORE:* couple of days before the session, a brief survey could made
> > available online and also shared via social media to get participants'
> > expectations from this session (any particular comments, questions,
> > aspects they are keen to see being explored in addition to those already
> > articulated in the draft); It is important to be flexible and take into
> > account the needs and interests of the broader community in regards to
> > this session. 
> > *DURING*:
> > - twitting with a hash tag for the session;
> > - use an online platform which could be used by anyone in the room (a
> > wiki page, etc) and participants could either:
> > 1. ask questions (address them to specific panelists) via this platform;
> > 2. respond to the questions addressed to the panelists via this platform;
> > - write in their comments/reflections on some flipcharts which might be
> > spread around the room;
> > *AFTER*: complete a short survey at the end of the session and thus
> > either share their reflections or leave any Qs that might be interested
> > in being explored in the future; It is important to continue building on
> > this experience and explore participants' feedback. 
> > 
> > These are just my few comments on this session! Well done and best of
> > luck!  
> > 
> > As ever,
> > Veronica
> >        
> > 
> > 
> > On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Subi Chaturvedi
> > <subichaturvedi at gmail.com <mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > 
> >     Dear All,
> > 
> >     Many thanks for your inputs and suggestions.. Marilyn and I are
> >     delighted to submit the draft for the Main session on Day 3 - 4th
> >     September, 2014.
> > 
> >     We remain grateful to you for you all the 18 + volunteers, MAG
> >     members and active members from the community, who gave freely of
> >     their time and made this exercise productive and meaningful. A big
> >     should out for :
> >     1. Olga Cavalli
> >     2.Anriette Esterhuyser
> >     3.Subi Chaturvedi
> >     4.Virat Bhatia
> >     5.Ana Neves
> >     6.Constance Bommelaer
> >     7.Kossi Amessinou
> >     8.Baher Esmat
> >     9.Izumi Aizu
> >     10.Shahram Soboutipour
> >     11.William Drake
> >     12.Jivan
> >     13.Patrick Ryan
> >     14.Ankhi Das
> >     15.Christine Arida
> >     16. Filiz
> >     17. Paul Wilson
> >     18. Mathew Shears
> >     19. Jeanette Hoffman
> >     20 Adam Peake
> >     21. Markus Kummer
> > 
> >     We thank you for your interest in the session. It's formulation has
> >     indeed benefitted from the experience of old MAG members and the
> >     energy and freshness of new stakeholder representatives. All
> >     possible attempts have been made to include all suggestions on
> >     format, speakers and policy questions. 
> > 
> >     We hope you will continue to guide and mentor this session and
> >     actively engage with us.
> > 
> >     A special thanks to Janis for keeping a constant watch and enriching
> >     this session in particular through a sustained engagement.
> > 
> >     Also thank you to my co-lead Marilyn Cade for her constant support
> >     and insights and to all the 16 original volunteers who have remained
> >     committed to the session over the past several months. Also hoping
> >     some of them will lend us their considerable skills at the venue for
> >     substantive rapporteuring.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >     warmest
> > 
> >     Subi Chaturvedi and Marilyn Cade
> > 
> > 
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     Igfmaglist mailing list
> >     Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
> >     http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > */Veronica Cretu /*
> > */
> > /**/President, Open Government Institute
> > /**/Republic of Moldova - _http://opengov.si.md/_/*
> > 
> > /*Member of the Steering Committee, */
> > /*Open Government Partnership (OGP);*/
> > */_http://www.opengovpartnership.org/about/steering-committee/role-and-current-membership_/*
> > 
> > /*Member of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group*/
> > /*To the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)*/
> > /*http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/1549
> > <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/>*/
> > 
> > /*Member of the Nominating Committee of ICANN*/
> > /*(Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbering)*/
> > /*http://www.icann.org/en/groups/nomcom/2014/members
> > <http://www.icann.org>*/
> > 
> > */Email: veronicacretu at gmail.com <mailto:veronicacretu at gmail.com> and/or
> > veronica at cretu.md <mailto:veronica at cretu.md>
> > Skype: veronicacretu
> > Phone: 373 067435000/*
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> > Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> > http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140811/573edd78/attachment.htm>

From cherkasov at un.org  Mon Aug 11 08:48:00 2014
From: cherkasov at un.org (Vyacheslav Cherkasov)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 08:48:00 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] The IGF Trust Fund - evaluation
In-Reply-To: <CANRKRpKbL+ahS4XHb7ffexvyLHOajk21d1ZyAKvwtHuPBg3_kg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpLTfGk4iQdPhKBOPCiAYXJkEx8pP=pbevzEcALUpZ0ymA@mail.gmail.com>
	<53D91968.6020104@acm.org>
	<CANRKRpLGEiNCZo7VWaH14J98zs3i_C9g-j2Yvk2F6zs6g2iSaA@mail.gmail.com>
	<53d95060.67a8700a.0aa0.2e93@mx.google.com>
	<OF74A48247.CA8D81F7-ON85257D2E.00786611-85257D2E.007910E3@un.org>
	<CANRKRpKbL+ahS4XHb7ffexvyLHOajk21d1ZyAKvwtHuPBg3_kg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <OF1D4DDC68.7B68A3E5-ON85257D31.004617C2-85257D31.00465042@un.org>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140811/abc3c9cd/attachment.htm>

From wjdrake at gmail.com  Tue Aug 12 01:12:57 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:12:57 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of
	Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to
	NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>
Message-ID: <6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>

Hi

On Aug 11, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> thank you for sharing your latest draft with this list, Subi and Marilyn.
> 
> In its current form this setup is not workable yet, imho. The first part has too many panelists and too many themes. I would suggest reducing the number of themes to two or three for a 90 min session.
> 
> The number of big names for this whole session seems overpowering to me. I don't see how a discussion between the panelists and the audience can be facilitated by moderators. If only third of these panelists decide to ignore the time restriction, the session will turn into a long and boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than once while moderating main sessions with important people?)
> 
> And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake proposed Samantha Dickinson and me as co-moderators. In the current draft, Samantha has got the role of a remote moderator while the co-organizers of this main session have included themselves as moderators. I find this a bit awkward and would prefer if the co-organizers would refrain from using their role to promote themselves for such tasks.
> 
> I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or impolite, this is really not my intention. However, at this late point in time I feel I have to be direct in my feedback.

Leaving aside the two dozen panelists issue, I have to admit I was a little surprised by the second, given Markus? comments about past practices, the ensuing discussion, and Janis? suggested formulation of a solution:

On Aug 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, karklinsj at gmail.com wrote:

> In February we discussed that the MAG members should exercise self-restraint in proposing workshops and participating in the sessions. This understanding should not be interpreted as a blanket ban but rather invitation. If all other options turn to be unfeasible the MAG members may be called for a rescue.


Is the contention here that all other options turned out to infeasible?  There was no public discussion about the moderators that came to this conclusion, and it?s not entirely obvious why one would need two moderators per panel, even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).

It?d be helpful to know: are the facilitators of any of the other main sessions also serving as their moderators?

Thanks

Bill


From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 12 01:20:38 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 01:20:38 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution
	of	Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction
	to	NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>
	<6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY406-EAS3116090EF4D795293A0350D3EA0@phx.gbl>

I believe some organizers  are moderating in some instances, Bill. But w just recently published write ups from Anriette and materials from the IANA transition session, and Markus's session re NN, easy to see.

Back to the Evol IG session, As I noted, we are winnowing down the list of names. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:13, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
>> On Aug 11, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> thank you for sharing your latest draft with this list, Subi and Marilyn.
>> 
>> In its current form this setup is not workable yet, imho. The first part has too many panelists and too many themes. I would suggest reducing the number of themes to two or three for a 90 min session.
>> 
>> The number of big names for this whole session seems overpowering to me. I don't see how a discussion between the panelists and the audience can be facilitated by moderators. If only third of these panelists decide to ignore the time restriction, the session will turn into a long and boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than once while moderating main sessions with important people?)
>> 
>> And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake proposed Samantha Dickinson and me as co-moderators. In the current draft, Samantha has got the role of a remote moderator while the co-organizers of this main session have included themselves as moderators. I find this a bit awkward and would prefer if the co-organizers would refrain from using their role to promote themselves for such tasks.
>> 
>> I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or impolite, this is really not my intention. However, at this late point in time I feel I have to be direct in my feedback.
> 
> Leaving aside the two dozen panelists issue, I have to admit I was a little surprised by the second, given Markus? comments about past practices, the ensuing discussion, and Janis? suggested formulation of a solution:
> 
>> On Aug 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, karklinsj at gmail.com wrote:
>> 
>> In February we discussed that the MAG members should exercise self-restraint in proposing workshops and participating in the sessions. This understanding should not be interpreted as a blanket ban but rather invitation. If all other options turn to be unfeasible the MAG members may be called for a rescue.
> 
> 
> Is the contention here that all other options turned out to infeasible?  There was no public discussion about the moderators that came to this conclusion, and it?s not entirely obvious why one would need two moderators per panel, even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).
> 
> It?d be helpful to know: are the facilitators of any of the other main sessions also serving as their moderators?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Bill
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

From kummer at isoc.org  Tue Aug 12 01:56:15 2014
From: kummer at isoc.org (Markus Kummer)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 05:56:15 +0000
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of
 Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial +
 CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <BAY406-EAS3116090EF4D795293A0350D3EA0@phx.gbl>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>
	<6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS3116090EF4D795293A0350D3EA0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <D00F7627.2E339%kummer@isoc.org>

Indeed, I am in a somewhat awkward position: I had argued against
conflating the roles of facilitators and moderators and ended up,
reluctantly, doing precisely that, i.e. assuming both roles. But I can
claim mitigating circumstances: this was the result of a lengthy
discussion on the NN list and it seemed that I was the lowest common
denominator. Also, we are structuring our discussion in a way that limits
the role of the moderator to a ?master of ceremony? who introduces the
discussion leaders and keeps the time, but does not engage in substantive
discussions.

Markus



On 12/08/14 07:20, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:

>I believe some organizers  are moderating in some instances, Bill. But w
>just recently published write ups from Anriette and materials from the
>IANA transition session, and Markus's session re NN, easy to see.
>
>Back to the Evol IG session, As I noted, we are winnowing down the list
>of names. 
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:13, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi
>> 
>>> On Aug 11, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> thank you for sharing your latest draft with this list, Subi and
>>>Marilyn.
>>> 
>>> In its current form this setup is not workable yet, imho. The first
>>>part has too many panelists and too many themes. I would suggest
>>>reducing the number of themes to two or three for a 90 min session.
>>> 
>>> The number of big names for this whole session seems overpowering to
>>>me. I don't see how a discussion between the panelists and the audience
>>>can be facilitated by moderators. If only third of these panelists
>>>decide to ignore the time restriction, the session will turn into a
>>>long and boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than once
>>>while moderating main sessions with important people?)
>>> 
>>> And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake proposed Samantha
>>>Dickinson and me as co-moderators. In the current draft, Samantha has
>>>got the role of a remote moderator while the co-organizers of this main
>>>session have included themselves as moderators. I find this a bit
>>>awkward and would prefer if the co-organizers would refrain from using
>>>their role to promote themselves for such tasks.
>>> 
>>> I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or impolite, this is
>>>really not my intention. However, at this late point in time I feel I
>>>have to be direct in my feedback.
>> 
>> Leaving aside the two dozen panelists issue, I have to admit I was a
>>little surprised by the second, given Markus? comments about past
>>practices, the ensuing discussion, and Janis? suggested formulation of a
>>solution:
>> 
>>> On Aug 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, karklinsj at gmail.com wrote:
>>> 
>>> In February we discussed that the MAG members should exercise
>>>self-restraint in proposing workshops and participating in the
>>>sessions. This understanding should not be interpreted as a blanket ban
>>>but rather invitation. If all other options turn to be unfeasible the
>>>MAG members may be called for a rescue.
>> 
>> 
>> Is the contention here that all other options turned out to infeasible?
>> There was no public discussion about the moderators that came to this
>>conclusion, and it?s not entirely obvious why one would need two
>>moderators per panel, even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).
>> 
>> It?d be helpful to know: are the facilitators of any of the other main
>>sessions also serving as their moderators?
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Bill
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> 
>>http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.o
>>rg
>_______________________________________________
>Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.or
>g




From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 12 01:59:39 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 01:59:39 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of
	Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to
	NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <D00F7627.2E339%kummer@isoc.org>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>
	<6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS3116090EF4D795293A0350D3EA0@phx.gbl>
	<D00F7627.2E339%kummer@isoc.org>
Message-ID: <BAY406-EAS208ADC2E9387FD8EAFFB472D3EA0@phx.gbl>

Thanks, Markus. I guess that is how I see the role of all moderators. Facilitating not editorializing. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:56, "Markus Kummer" <kummer at isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> Indeed, I am in a somewhat awkward position: I had argued against
> conflating the roles of facilitators and moderators and ended up,
> reluctantly, doing precisely that, i.e. assuming both roles. But I can
> claim mitigating circumstances: this was the result of a lengthy
> discussion on the NN list and it seemed that I was the lowest common
> denominator. Also, we are structuring our discussion in a way that limits
> the role of the moderator to a ?master of ceremony? who introduces the
> discussion leaders and keeps the time, but does not engage in substantive
> discussions.
> 
> Markus
> 
> 
> 
>> On 12/08/14 07:20, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I believe some organizers  are moderating in some instances, Bill. But w
>> just recently published write ups from Anriette and materials from the
>> IANA transition session, and Markus's session re NN, easy to see.
>> 
>> Back to the Evol IG session, As I noted, we are winnowing down the list
>> of names. 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:13, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 11, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> thank you for sharing your latest draft with this list, Subi and
>>>> Marilyn.
>>>> 
>>>> In its current form this setup is not workable yet, imho. The first
>>>> part has too many panelists and too many themes. I would suggest
>>>> reducing the number of themes to two or three for a 90 min session.
>>>> 
>>>> The number of big names for this whole session seems overpowering to
>>>> me. I don't see how a discussion between the panelists and the audience
>>>> can be facilitated by moderators. If only third of these panelists
>>>> decide to ignore the time restriction, the session will turn into a
>>>> long and boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than once
>>>> while moderating main sessions with important people?)
>>>> 
>>>> And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake proposed Samantha
>>>> Dickinson and me as co-moderators. In the current draft, Samantha has
>>>> got the role of a remote moderator while the co-organizers of this main
>>>> session have included themselves as moderators. I find this a bit
>>>> awkward and would prefer if the co-organizers would refrain from using
>>>> their role to promote themselves for such tasks.
>>>> 
>>>> I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or impolite, this is
>>>> really not my intention. However, at this late point in time I feel I
>>>> have to be direct in my feedback.
>>> 
>>> Leaving aside the two dozen panelists issue, I have to admit I was a
>>> little surprised by the second, given Markus? comments about past
>>> practices, the ensuing discussion, and Janis? suggested formulation of a
>>> solution:
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, karklinsj at gmail.com wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> In February we discussed that the MAG members should exercise
>>>> self-restraint in proposing workshops and participating in the
>>>> sessions. This understanding should not be interpreted as a blanket ban
>>>> but rather invitation. If all other options turn to be unfeasible the
>>>> MAG members may be called for a rescue.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Is the contention here that all other options turned out to infeasible?
>>> There was no public discussion about the moderators that came to this
>>> conclusion, and it?s not entirely obvious why one would need two
>>> moderators per panel, even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).
>>> 
>>> It?d be helpful to know: are the facilitators of any of the other main
>>> sessions also serving as their moderators?
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> 
>>> Bill
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>> 
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.o
>>> rg
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.or
>> g
> 

From jeanette at wzb.eu  Tue Aug 12 03:23:27 2014
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:23:27 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of
 Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial +
 CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <BAY406-EAS208ADC2E9387FD8EAFFB472D3EA0@phx.gbl>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>	<53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>	<6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>	<BAY406-EAS3116090EF4D795293A0350D3EA0@phx.gbl>	<D00F7627.2E339%kummer@isoc.org>
	<BAY406-EAS208ADC2E9387FD8EAFFB472D3EA0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <53E9C0EF.8090109@wzb.eu>

My guess is such a "master of ceremony" approach does not work with the 
Evol IG main session and its high  number of speakers.
I am not sure these two main sessions can be compared.

Jeanette

Am 12.08.14 07:59, schrieb Marilyn Cade:
> Thanks, Markus. I guess that is how I see the role of all moderators. Facilitating not editorializing.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:56, "Markus Kummer" <kummer at isoc.org> wrote:
>>
>> Indeed, I am in a somewhat awkward position: I had argued against
>> conflating the roles of facilitators and moderators and ended up,
>> reluctantly, doing precisely that, i.e. assuming both roles. But I can
>> claim mitigating circumstances: this was the result of a lengthy
>> discussion on the NN list and it seemed that I was the lowest common
>> denominator. Also, we are structuring our discussion in a way that limits
>> the role of the moderator to a ?master of ceremony? who introduces the
>> discussion leaders and keeps the time, but does not engage in substantive
>> discussions.
>>
>> Markus
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 12/08/14 07:20, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I believe some organizers  are moderating in some instances, Bill. But w
>>> just recently published write ups from Anriette and materials from the
>>> IANA transition session, and Markus's session re NN, easy to see.
>>>
>>> Back to the Evol IG session, As I noted, we are winnowing down the list
>>> of names.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:13, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 11, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> thank you for sharing your latest draft with this list, Subi and
>>>>> Marilyn.
>>>>>
>>>>> In its current form this setup is not workable yet, imho. The first
>>>>> part has too many panelists and too many themes. I would suggest
>>>>> reducing the number of themes to two or three for a 90 min session.
>>>>>
>>>>> The number of big names for this whole session seems overpowering to
>>>>> me. I don't see how a discussion between the panelists and the audience
>>>>> can be facilitated by moderators. If only third of these panelists
>>>>> decide to ignore the time restriction, the session will turn into a
>>>>> long and boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than once
>>>>> while moderating main sessions with important people?)
>>>>>
>>>>> And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake proposed Samantha
>>>>> Dickinson and me as co-moderators. In the current draft, Samantha has
>>>>> got the role of a remote moderator while the co-organizers of this main
>>>>> session have included themselves as moderators. I find this a bit
>>>>> awkward and would prefer if the co-organizers would refrain from using
>>>>> their role to promote themselves for such tasks.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or impolite, this is
>>>>> really not my intention. However, at this late point in time I feel I
>>>>> have to be direct in my feedback.
>>>>
>>>> Leaving aside the two dozen panelists issue, I have to admit I was a
>>>> little surprised by the second, given Markus? comments about past
>>>> practices, the ensuing discussion, and Janis? suggested formulation of a
>>>> solution:
>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, karklinsj at gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> In February we discussed that the MAG members should exercise
>>>>> self-restraint in proposing workshops and participating in the
>>>>> sessions. This understanding should not be interpreted as a blanket ban
>>>>> but rather invitation. If all other options turn to be unfeasible the
>>>>> MAG members may be called for a rescue.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is the contention here that all other options turned out to infeasible?
>>>> There was no public discussion about the moderators that came to this
>>>> conclusion, and it?s not entirely obvious why one would need two
>>>> moderators per panel, even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).
>>>>
>>>> It?d be helpful to know: are the facilitators of any of the other main
>>>> sessions also serving as their moderators?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>
>>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.o
>>>> rg
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.or
>>> g
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>



From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Tue Aug 12 03:35:39 2014
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 16:35:39 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
	template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of
	the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU,
	other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <BAY406-EAS208ADC2E9387FD8EAFFB472D3EA0@phx.gbl>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>
	<6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS3116090EF4D795293A0350D3EA0@phx.gbl>
	<D00F7627.2E339%kummer@isoc.org>
	<BAY406-EAS208ADC2E9387FD8EAFFB472D3EA0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <0F9DE620-747C-412A-92A1-6A03BBF2590D@glocom.ac.jp>

Hi Marilyn,


On Aug 12, 2014, at 2:59 PM, Marilyn Cade wrote:

> Thanks, Markus. I guess that is how I see the role of all moderators. Facilitating not editorializing. 
> 


I think Markus is describing a different role -- very much a neutral master of ceremonies and time keeper, the net neutrality session will have a number of other facilitators.

As others mentioned, I also thought Sam Dickinson had been agreed as co-moderator, proposed some weeks ago. As the most skillful observer of all the processes to be considered during the session I think she'd be a great choice.

You're right of course about the "Setting scene" session, but that's really for the people involved in that session to sort out.  I personally think best for the session leads and MAG members to take a step back.  

(list MAG-public <igfmaglist at intgovforum.org> not cc'd, not sure I have posting rights)

Best,

Adam


> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:56, "Markus Kummer" <kummer at isoc.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Indeed, I am in a somewhat awkward position: I had argued against
>> conflating the roles of facilitators and moderators and ended up,
>> reluctantly, doing precisely that, i.e. assuming both roles. But I can
>> claim mitigating circumstances: this was the result of a lengthy
>> discussion on the NN list and it seemed that I was the lowest common
>> denominator. Also, we are structuring our discussion in a way that limits
>> the role of the moderator to a ?master of ceremony? who introduces the
>> discussion leaders and keeps the time, but does not engage in substantive
>> discussions.
>> 
>> Markus
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 12/08/14 07:20, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I believe some organizers  are moderating in some instances, Bill. But w
>>> just recently published write ups from Anriette and materials from the
>>> IANA transition session, and Markus's session re NN, easy to see.
>>> 
>>> Back to the Evol IG session, As I noted, we are winnowing down the list
>>> of names. 
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:13, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi
>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 11, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> thank you for sharing your latest draft with this list, Subi and
>>>>> Marilyn.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In its current form this setup is not workable yet, imho. The first
>>>>> part has too many panelists and too many themes. I would suggest
>>>>> reducing the number of themes to two or three for a 90 min session.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The number of big names for this whole session seems overpowering to
>>>>> me. I don't see how a discussion between the panelists and the audience
>>>>> can be facilitated by moderators. If only third of these panelists
>>>>> decide to ignore the time restriction, the session will turn into a
>>>>> long and boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than once
>>>>> while moderating main sessions with important people?)
>>>>> 
>>>>> And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake proposed Samantha
>>>>> Dickinson and me as co-moderators. In the current draft, Samantha has
>>>>> got the role of a remote moderator while the co-organizers of this main
>>>>> session have included themselves as moderators. I find this a bit
>>>>> awkward and would prefer if the co-organizers would refrain from using
>>>>> their role to promote themselves for such tasks.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or impolite, this is
>>>>> really not my intention. However, at this late point in time I feel I
>>>>> have to be direct in my feedback.
>>>> 
>>>> Leaving aside the two dozen panelists issue, I have to admit I was a
>>>> little surprised by the second, given Markus? comments about past
>>>> practices, the ensuing discussion, and Janis? suggested formulation of a
>>>> solution:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, karklinsj at gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> In February we discussed that the MAG members should exercise
>>>>> self-restraint in proposing workshops and participating in the
>>>>> sessions. This understanding should not be interpreted as a blanket ban
>>>>> but rather invitation. If all other options turn to be unfeasible the
>>>>> MAG members may be called for a rescue.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Is the contention here that all other options turned out to infeasible?
>>>> There was no public discussion about the moderators that came to this
>>>> conclusion, and it?s not entirely obvious why one would need two
>>>> moderators per panel, even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).
>>>> 
>>>> It?d be helpful to know: are the facilitators of any of the other main
>>>> sessions also serving as their moderators?
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks
>>>> 
>>>> Bill
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>> 
>>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.o
>>>> rg
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.or
>>> g
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org




From iza at anr.org  Tue Aug 12 03:42:10 2014
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 16:42:10 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Draft: Main session
 template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF -
 Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <0F9DE620-747C-412A-92A1-6A03BBF2590D@glocom.ac.jp>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>
	<6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS3116090EF4D795293A0350D3EA0@phx.gbl>
	<D00F7627.2E339%kummer@isoc.org>
	<BAY406-EAS208ADC2E9387FD8EAFFB472D3EA0@phx.gbl>
	<0F9DE620-747C-412A-92A1-6A03BBF2590D@glocom.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKgZrD+TjdGjTGBKnDOF1t1v4MxAe8jG5cj-AAVkvEsSng@mail.gmail.com>

Though I was a co-facilitator and also played the role of moderator two
years ago on emerging issues, inside MAG, I support what Bill and Adam
suggested, for this session.
Considering NETMundial's influence, Adam may also be a good candidate for
moderator, too, I like to see some gender balance, too.

Izumi

2014?8?12?????Adam<ajp at glocom.ac.jp>????????:

> Hi Marilyn,
>
>
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 2:59 PM, Marilyn Cade wrote:
>
> > Thanks, Markus. I guess that is how I see the role of all moderators.
> Facilitating not editorializing.
> >
>
>
> I think Markus is describing a different role -- very much a neutral
> master of ceremonies and time keeper, the net neutrality session will have
> a number of other facilitators.
>
> As others mentioned, I also thought Sam Dickinson had been agreed as
> co-moderator, proposed some weeks ago. As the most skillful observer of all
> the processes to be considered during the session I think she'd be a great
> choice.
>
> You're right of course about the "Setting scene" session, but that's
> really for the people involved in that session to sort out.  I personally
> think best for the session leads and MAG members to take a step back.
>
> (list MAG-public <igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <javascript:;>> not cc'd,
> not sure I have posting rights)
>
> Best,
>
> Adam
>
>
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:56, "Markus Kummer" <kummer at isoc.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Indeed, I am in a somewhat awkward position: I had argued against
> >> conflating the roles of facilitators and moderators and ended up,
> >> reluctantly, doing precisely that, i.e. assuming both roles. But I can
> >> claim mitigating circumstances: this was the result of a lengthy
> >> discussion on the NN list and it seemed that I was the lowest common
> >> denominator. Also, we are structuring our discussion in a way that
> limits
> >> the role of the moderator to a ?master of ceremony? who introduces the
> >> discussion leaders and keeps the time, but does not engage in
> substantive
> >> discussions.
> >>
> >> Markus
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 12/08/14 07:20, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade at hotmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I believe some organizers  are moderating in some instances, Bill. But
> w
> >>> just recently published write ups from Anriette and materials from the
> >>> IANA transition session, and Markus's session re NN, easy to see.
> >>>
> >>> Back to the Evol IG session, As I noted, we are winnowing down the list
> >>> of names.
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>
> >>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:13, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Aug 11, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thank you for sharing your latest draft with this list, Subi and
> >>>>> Marilyn.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In its current form this setup is not workable yet, imho. The first
> >>>>> part has too many panelists and too many themes. I would suggest
> >>>>> reducing the number of themes to two or three for a 90 min session.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The number of big names for this whole session seems overpowering to
> >>>>> me. I don't see how a discussion between the panelists and the
> audience
> >>>>> can be facilitated by moderators. If only third of these panelists
> >>>>> decide to ignore the time restriction, the session will turn into a
> >>>>> long and boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than once
> >>>>> while moderating main sessions with important people?)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake proposed Samantha
> >>>>> Dickinson and me as co-moderators. In the current draft, Samantha has
> >>>>> got the role of a remote moderator while the co-organizers of this
> main
> >>>>> session have included themselves as moderators. I find this a bit
> >>>>> awkward and would prefer if the co-organizers would refrain from
> using
> >>>>> their role to promote themselves for such tasks.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or impolite, this is
> >>>>> really not my intention. However, at this late point in time I feel I
> >>>>> have to be direct in my feedback.
> >>>>
> >>>> Leaving aside the two dozen panelists issue, I have to admit I was a
> >>>> little surprised by the second, given Markus? comments about past
> >>>> practices, the ensuing discussion, and Janis? suggested formulation
> of a
> >>>> solution:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Aug 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, karklinsj at gmail.com <javascript:;>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In February we discussed that the MAG members should exercise
> >>>>> self-restraint in proposing workshops and participating in the
> >>>>> sessions. This understanding should not be interpreted as a blanket
> ban
> >>>>> but rather invitation. If all other options turn to be unfeasible the
> >>>>> MAG members may be called for a rescue.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Is the contention here that all other options turned out to
> infeasible?
> >>>> There was no public discussion about the moderators that came to this
> >>>> conclusion, and it?s not entirely obvious why one would need two
> >>>> moderators per panel, even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).
> >>>>
> >>>> It?d be helpful to know: are the facilitators of any of the other main
> >>>> sessions also serving as their moderators?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>>
> >>>> Bill
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> >>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org <javascript:;>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.o
> >>>> rg
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> >>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org <javascript:;>
> >>>
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.or
> >>> g
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Igfmaglist mailing list
> > Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org <javascript:;>
> > http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org <javascript:;>
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>

-- 
                     >> Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
Japan
www.anr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140812/a6364019/attachment.htm>

From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 12 06:40:00 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 06:40:00 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of
 Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial +
 CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <53E9C0EF.8090109@wzb.eu>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>	<6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>
	<BAY406-EAS3116090EF4D795293A0350D3EA0@phx.gbl>
	<D00F7627.2E339%kummer@isoc.org>,
	<BAY406-EAS208ADC2E9387FD8EAFFB472D3EA0@phx.gbl>,
	<53E9C0EF.8090109@wzb.eu>
Message-ID: <BAY169-W5A4DE204C1B5B08FF0E54D3EA0@phx.gbl>

thanks, Jeanette. 

> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:23:27 +0200
> From: jeanette at wzb.eu
> To: evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
> 
> My guess is such a "master of ceremony" approach does not work with the 
> Evol IG main session and its high  number of speakers.
> I am not sure these two main sessions can be compared.
> 
> Jeanette
> 
> Am 12.08.14 07:59, schrieb Marilyn Cade:
> > Thanks, Markus. I guess that is how I see the role of all moderators. Facilitating not editorializing.
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:56, "Markus Kummer" <kummer at isoc.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Indeed, I am in a somewhat awkward position: I had argued against
> >> conflating the roles of facilitators and moderators and ended up,
> >> reluctantly, doing precisely that, i.e. assuming both roles. But I can
> >> claim mitigating circumstances: this was the result of a lengthy
> >> discussion on the NN list and it seemed that I was the lowest common
> >> denominator. Also, we are structuring our discussion in a way that limits
> >> the role of the moderator to a ?master of ceremony? who introduces the
> >> discussion leaders and keeps the time, but does not engage in substantive
> >> discussions.
> >>
> >> Markus
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 12/08/14 07:20, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I believe some organizers  are moderating in some instances, Bill. But w
> >>> just recently published write ups from Anriette and materials from the
> >>> IANA transition session, and Markus's session re NN, easy to see.
> >>>
> >>> Back to the Evol IG session, As I noted, we are winnowing down the list
> >>> of names.
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>
> >>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:13, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Aug 11, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thank you for sharing your latest draft with this list, Subi and
> >>>>> Marilyn.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In its current form this setup is not workable yet, imho. The first
> >>>>> part has too many panelists and too many themes. I would suggest
> >>>>> reducing the number of themes to two or three for a 90 min session.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The number of big names for this whole session seems overpowering to
> >>>>> me. I don't see how a discussion between the panelists and the audience
> >>>>> can be facilitated by moderators. If only third of these panelists
> >>>>> decide to ignore the time restriction, the session will turn into a
> >>>>> long and boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than once
> >>>>> while moderating main sessions with important people?)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake proposed Samantha
> >>>>> Dickinson and me as co-moderators. In the current draft, Samantha has
> >>>>> got the role of a remote moderator while the co-organizers of this main
> >>>>> session have included themselves as moderators. I find this a bit
> >>>>> awkward and would prefer if the co-organizers would refrain from using
> >>>>> their role to promote themselves for such tasks.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or impolite, this is
> >>>>> really not my intention. However, at this late point in time I feel I
> >>>>> have to be direct in my feedback.
> >>>>
> >>>> Leaving aside the two dozen panelists issue, I have to admit I was a
> >>>> little surprised by the second, given Markus? comments about past
> >>>> practices, the ensuing discussion, and Janis? suggested formulation of a
> >>>> solution:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Aug 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, karklinsj at gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In February we discussed that the MAG members should exercise
> >>>>> self-restraint in proposing workshops and participating in the
> >>>>> sessions. This understanding should not be interpreted as a blanket ban
> >>>>> but rather invitation. If all other options turn to be unfeasible the
> >>>>> MAG members may be called for a rescue.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Is the contention here that all other options turned out to infeasible?
> >>>> There was no public discussion about the moderators that came to this
> >>>> conclusion, and it?s not entirely obvious why one would need two
> >>>> moderators per panel, even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).
> >>>>
> >>>> It?d be helpful to know: are the facilitators of any of the other main
> >>>> sessions also serving as their moderators?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>>
> >>>> Bill
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> >>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> >>>>
> >>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.o
> >>>> rg
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> >>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> >>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.or
> >>> g
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> > Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> > http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140812/a3c202ea/attachment.htm>

From avri at acm.org  Thu Aug 14 15:52:35 2014
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 15:52:35 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of
 Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial +
 CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <BAY169-W5A4DE204C1B5B08FF0E54D3EA0@phx.gbl>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>	<53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>	<6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>	<BAY406-EAS3116090EF4D795293A0350D3EA0@phx.gbl>	<D00F7627.2E339%kummer@isoc.org>,
	<BAY406-EAS208ADC2E9387FD8EAFFB472D3EA0@phx.gbl>,
	<53E9C0EF.8090109@wzb.eu> <BAY169-W5A4DE204C1B5B08FF0E54D3EA0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <53ED1383.4050102@acm.org>

Hi,

Forgive me, but I find myself confused again.

I read that in principle we still don't want the MAG moderating all the
sessions, but throughout the current IGF meeting MAG members appear to
have good reasons for deciding to doing so.

Not sure why this is one of those circumstance since we have good
non-MAG moderators standing by for each of the hemisessions.  How does
two moderators for each half session make this main session better?  How
do two moderators not interfere with each other?  Does each moderator
take a speaking slot at the beginning.   Does one introduce and the
other close?  Seems awkward to me.  I guess I just don't understand.


And I guess that while I know how that first part of the sessions when
the 19 leaders speak, will work, I am still confused about how the
second part will work.  I know you patiently tried to explain it to me,
but i still see lots and lots of names and lots of topics and am not
clear on how it all fits together.

Also how do the feeder WS get fed in at ~ 20 speakers in effectively 80
minutes, there are at most 4 minutes to speak.

Also how are all the issues about additional speakers not yet included
being handled.

As i say, when I look at all of this, I get confused.

Forgive me for continuing to ask stupid questions.

avri



On 12-Aug-14 06:40, Marilyn Cade wrote:
> thanks, Jeanette. 
> 
>> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:23:27 +0200
>> From: jeanette at wzb.eu
>> To: evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution
> of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to
> NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
>>
>> My guess is such a "master of ceremony" approach does not work with the
>> Evol IG main session and its high number of speakers.
>> I am not sure these two main sessions can be compared.
>>
>> Jeanette
>>
>> Am 12.08.14 07:59, schrieb Marilyn Cade:
>> > Thanks, Markus. I guess that is how I see the role of all
> moderators. Facilitating not editorializing.
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPhone
>> >
>> >> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:56, "Markus Kummer" <kummer at isoc.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Indeed, I am in a somewhat awkward position: I had argued against
>> >> conflating the roles of facilitators and moderators and ended up,
>> >> reluctantly, doing precisely that, i.e. assuming both roles. But I can
>> >> claim mitigating circumstances: this was the result of a lengthy
>> >> discussion on the NN list and it seemed that I was the lowest common
>> >> denominator. Also, we are structuring our discussion in a way that
> limits
>> >> the role of the moderator to a ?master of ceremony? who introduces the
>> >> discussion leaders and keeps the time, but does not engage in
> substantive
>> >> discussions.
>> >>
>> >> Markus
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> On 12/08/14 07:20, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I believe some organizers are moderating in some instances, Bill.
> But w
>> >>> just recently published write ups from Anriette and materials from the
>> >>> IANA transition session, and Markus's session re NN, easy to see.
>> >>>
>> >>> Back to the Evol IG session, As I noted, we are winnowing down the
> list
>> >>> of names.
>> >>>
>> >>> Sent from my iPhone
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:13, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hi
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On Aug 11, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu>
> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> thank you for sharing your latest draft with this list, Subi and
>> >>>>> Marilyn.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> In its current form this setup is not workable yet, imho. The first
>> >>>>> part has too many panelists and too many themes. I would suggest
>> >>>>> reducing the number of themes to two or three for a 90 min session.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The number of big names for this whole session seems overpowering to
>> >>>>> me. I don't see how a discussion between the panelists and the
> audience
>> >>>>> can be facilitated by moderators. If only third of these panelists
>> >>>>> decide to ignore the time restriction, the session will turn into a
>> >>>>> long and boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than once
>> >>>>> while moderating main sessions with important people?)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake proposed Samantha
>> >>>>> Dickinson and me as co-moderators. In the current draft,
> Samantha has
>> >>>>> got the role of a remote moderator while the co-organizers of
> this main
>> >>>>> session have included themselves as moderators. I find this a bit
>> >>>>> awkward and would prefer if the co-organizers would refrain from
> using
>> >>>>> their role to promote themselves for such tasks.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or impolite, this is
>> >>>>> really not my intention. However, at this late point in time I
> feel I
>> >>>>> have to be direct in my feedback.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Leaving aside the two dozen panelists issue, I have to admit I was a
>> >>>> little surprised by the second, given Markus? comments about past
>> >>>> practices, the ensuing discussion, and Janis? suggested
> formulation of a
>> >>>> solution:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On Aug 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, karklinsj at gmail.com wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> In February we discussed that the MAG members should exercise
>> >>>>> self-restraint in proposing workshops and participating in the
>> >>>>> sessions. This understanding should not be interpreted as a
> blanket ban
>> >>>>> but rather invitation. If all other options turn to be
> unfeasible the
>> >>>>> MAG members may be called for a rescue.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Is the contention here that all other options turned out to
> infeasible?
>> >>>> There was no public discussion about the moderators that came to this
>> >>>> conclusion, and it?s not entirely obvious why one would need two
>> >>>> moderators per panel, even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It?d be helpful to know: are the facilitators of any of the other
> main
>> >>>> sessions also serving as their moderators?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thanks
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Bill
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> >>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.o
>> >>>> rg
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> >>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> >>>
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.or
>> >>> g
>> >>
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> > Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> >
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
> 



From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Fri Aug 15 05:00:05 2014
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 18:00:05 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of
	Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to
	NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <53ED1383.4050102@acm.org>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>	<53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>	<6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>	<BAY406-EAS3116090EF4D795293A0350D3EA0@phx.gbl>	<D00F7627.2E339%kummer@isoc.org>,
	<BAY406-EAS208ADC2E9387FD8EAFFB472D3EA0@phx.gbl>,
	<53E9C0EF.8090109@wzb.eu> <BAY169-W5A4DE204C1B5B08FF0E54D3EA0@phx.gbl>
	<53ED1383.4050102@acm.org>
Message-ID: <AD856C8B-D449-4251-A6D0-D0D551F43D99@glocom.ac.jp>

Agree with Avri's comments, and confusion.

Such a complex session is going to need very tight moderating, weaving in both the many named participants (concern some of these "vip" level people aren't going to be happy with just one or two 2 minute sound bites) and the "feeder" workshops.  

We know from past attempts to involve workshops on topics related to the main session that just reporting in doesn't work, more often than not their intervention breaks the flow of any conversation.  Need to be called on for an informed perspective, not a report of their 90 minute workshop. Need team supporting the moderators, and I hope we can stick with the principle of MAG supporting ("convening", which is it's primary task) the meeting.

Best,

Adam



On Aug 15, 2014, at 4:52 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Forgive me, but I find myself confused again.
> 
> I read that in principle we still don't want the MAG moderating all the
> sessions, but throughout the current IGF meeting MAG members appear to
> have good reasons for deciding to doing so.
> 
> Not sure why this is one of those circumstance since we have good
> non-MAG moderators standing by for each of the hemisessions.  How does
> two moderators for each half session make this main session better?  How
> do two moderators not interfere with each other?  Does each moderator
> take a speaking slot at the beginning.   Does one introduce and the
> other close?  Seems awkward to me.  I guess I just don't understand.
> 
> 
> And I guess that while I know how that first part of the sessions when
> the 19 leaders speak, will work, I am still confused about how the
> second part will work.  I know you patiently tried to explain it to me,
> but i still see lots and lots of names and lots of topics and am not
> clear on how it all fits together.
> 
> Also how do the feeder WS get fed in at ~ 20 speakers in effectively 80
> minutes, there are at most 4 minutes to speak.
> 
> Also how are all the issues about additional speakers not yet included
> being handled.
> 
> As i say, when I look at all of this, I get confused.
> 
> Forgive me for continuing to ask stupid questions.
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> 
> On 12-Aug-14 06:40, Marilyn Cade wrote:
>> thanks, Jeanette. 
>> 
>>> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:23:27 +0200
>>> From: jeanette at wzb.eu
>>> To: evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>> Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution
>> of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to
>> NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
>>> 
>>> My guess is such a "master of ceremony" approach does not work with the
>>> Evol IG main session and its high number of speakers.
>>> I am not sure these two main sessions can be compared.
>>> 
>>> Jeanette
>>> 
>>> Am 12.08.14 07:59, schrieb Marilyn Cade:
>>>> Thanks, Markus. I guess that is how I see the role of all
>> moderators. Facilitating not editorializing.
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:56, "Markus Kummer" <kummer at isoc.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Indeed, I am in a somewhat awkward position: I had argued against
>>>>> conflating the roles of facilitators and moderators and ended up,
>>>>> reluctantly, doing precisely that, i.e. assuming both roles. But I can
>>>>> claim mitigating circumstances: this was the result of a lengthy
>>>>> discussion on the NN list and it seemed that I was the lowest common
>>>>> denominator. Also, we are structuring our discussion in a way that
>> limits
>>>>> the role of the moderator to a ?master of ceremony? who introduces the
>>>>> discussion leaders and keeps the time, but does not engage in
>> substantive
>>>>> discussions.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Markus
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 12/08/14 07:20, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I believe some organizers are moderating in some instances, Bill.
>> But w
>>>>>> just recently published write ups from Anriette and materials from the
>>>>>> IANA transition session, and Markus's session re NN, easy to see.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Back to the Evol IG session, As I noted, we are winnowing down the
>> list
>>>>>> of names.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:13, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> thank you for sharing your latest draft with this list, Subi and
>>>>>>>> Marilyn.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> In its current form this setup is not workable yet, imho. The first
>>>>>>>> part has too many panelists and too many themes. I would suggest
>>>>>>>> reducing the number of themes to two or three for a 90 min session.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The number of big names for this whole session seems overpowering to
>>>>>>>> me. I don't see how a discussion between the panelists and the
>> audience
>>>>>>>> can be facilitated by moderators. If only third of these panelists
>>>>>>>> decide to ignore the time restriction, the session will turn into a
>>>>>>>> long and boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than once
>>>>>>>> while moderating main sessions with important people?)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake proposed Samantha
>>>>>>>> Dickinson and me as co-moderators. In the current draft,
>> Samantha has
>>>>>>>> got the role of a remote moderator while the co-organizers of
>> this main
>>>>>>>> session have included themselves as moderators. I find this a bit
>>>>>>>> awkward and would prefer if the co-organizers would refrain from
>> using
>>>>>>>> their role to promote themselves for such tasks.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or impolite, this is
>>>>>>>> really not my intention. However, at this late point in time I
>> feel I
>>>>>>>> have to be direct in my feedback.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Leaving aside the two dozen panelists issue, I have to admit I was a
>>>>>>> little surprised by the second, given Markus? comments about past
>>>>>>> practices, the ensuing discussion, and Janis? suggested
>> formulation of a
>>>>>>> solution:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Aug 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, karklinsj at gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> In February we discussed that the MAG members should exercise
>>>>>>>> self-restraint in proposing workshops and participating in the
>>>>>>>> sessions. This understanding should not be interpreted as a
>> blanket ban
>>>>>>>> but rather invitation. If all other options turn to be
>> unfeasible the
>>>>>>>> MAG members may be called for a rescue.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Is the contention here that all other options turned out to
>> infeasible?
>>>>>>> There was no public discussion about the moderators that came to this
>>>>>>> conclusion, and it?s not entirely obvious why one would need two
>>>>>>> moderators per panel, even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It?d be helpful to know: are the facilitators of any of the other
>> main
>>>>>>> sessions also serving as their moderators?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.o
>>>>>>> rg
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>>> 
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.or
>>>>>> g
>>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>> 
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>> 
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org




From jeanette at wzb.eu  Fri Aug 15 05:17:08 2014
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 11:17:08 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of
 Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to NETmundial +
 CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <AD856C8B-D449-4251-A6D0-D0D551F43D99@glocom.ac.jp>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>	<53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>	<6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>	<BAY406-EAS3116090EF4D795293A0350D3EA0@phx.gbl>	<D00F7627.2E339%kummer@isoc.org>,
	<BAY406-EAS208ADC2E9387FD8EAFFB472D3EA0@phx.gbl>,
	<53E9C0EF.8090109@wzb.eu>
	<BAY169-W5A4DE204C1B5B08FF0E54D3EA0@phx.gbl>	<53ED1383.4050102@acm.org>
	<AD856C8B-D449-4251-A6D0-D0D551F43D99@glocom.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <53EDD014.5060503@wzb.eu>

Avri and Adam,

thank you very much for these comments. I like the idea
of forming a team to plan and organize this session, which indeed looks 
rather complex at the moment.
Strengthening the IGF also means to strenghten the quality of its debates.

The relevance of NetMundial and is relationship to the IGF is on many 
people's mind at the moment. These are excellent conditions for an 
interesting and insightful discussion. We need to be ambitious to make 
the most of this opportunity.

jeanette

Am 15.08.14 11:00, schrieb Adam:
> Agree with Avri's comments, and confusion.
>
> Such a complex session is going to need very tight moderating,
> weaving in both the many named participants (concern some of these
> "vip" level people aren't going to be happy with just one or two 2
> minute sound bites) and the "feeder" workshops.
>
> We know from past attempts to involve workshops on topics related to
> the main session that just reporting in doesn't work, more often than
> not their intervention breaks the flow of any conversation.  Need to
> be called on for an informed perspective, not a report of their 90
> minute workshop. Need team supporting the moderators, and I hope we
> can stick with the principle of MAG supporting ("convening", which is
> it's primary task) the meeting.
>
> Best,
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> On Aug 15, 2014, at 4:52 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Forgive me, but I find myself confused again.
>>
>> I read that in principle we still don't want the MAG moderating all
>> the sessions, but throughout the current IGF meeting MAG members
>> appear to have good reasons for deciding to doing so.
>>
>> Not sure why this is one of those circumstance since we have good
>> non-MAG moderators standing by for each of the hemisessions.  How
>> does two moderators for each half session make this main session
>> better?  How do two moderators not interfere with each other?  Does
>> each moderator take a speaking slot at the beginning.   Does one
>> introduce and the other close?  Seems awkward to me.  I guess I
>> just don't understand.
>>
>>
>> And I guess that while I know how that first part of the sessions
>> when the 19 leaders speak, will work, I am still confused about how
>> the second part will work.  I know you patiently tried to explain
>> it to me, but i still see lots and lots of names and lots of topics
>> and am not clear on how it all fits together.
>>
>> Also how do the feeder WS get fed in at ~ 20 speakers in
>> effectively 80 minutes, there are at most 4 minutes to speak.
>>
>> Also how are all the issues about additional speakers not yet
>> included being handled.
>>
>> As i say, when I look at all of this, I get confused.
>>
>> Forgive me for continuing to ask stupid questions.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12-Aug-14 06:40, Marilyn Cade wrote:
>>> thanks, Jeanette.
>>>
>>>> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:23:27 +0200 From: jeanette at wzb.eu To:
>>>> evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014]
>>>> Draft: Main session template-Evolution
>>> of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to
>>> NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
>>>>
>>>> My guess is such a "master of ceremony" approach does not work
>>>> with the Evol IG main session and its high number of speakers.
>>>> I am not sure these two main sessions can be compared.
>>>>
>>>> Jeanette
>>>>
>>>> Am 12.08.14 07:59, schrieb Marilyn Cade:
>>>>> Thanks, Markus. I guess that is how I see the role of all
>>> moderators. Facilitating not editorializing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:56, "Markus Kummer" <kummer at isoc.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed, I am in a somewhat awkward position: I had argued
>>>>>> against conflating the roles of facilitators and moderators
>>>>>> and ended up, reluctantly, doing precisely that, i.e.
>>>>>> assuming both roles. But I can claim mitigating
>>>>>> circumstances: this was the result of a lengthy discussion
>>>>>> on the NN list and it seemed that I was the lowest common
>>>>>> denominator. Also, we are structuring our discussion in a
>>>>>> way that
>>> limits
>>>>>> the role of the moderator to a ?master of ceremony? who
>>>>>> introduces the discussion leaders and keeps the time, but
>>>>>> does not engage in
>>> substantive
>>>>>> discussions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Markus
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 12/08/14 07:20, "Marilyn Cade"
>>>>>>> <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I believe some organizers are moderating in some
>>>>>>> instances, Bill.
>>> But w
>>>>>>> just recently published write ups from Anriette and
>>>>>>> materials from the IANA transition session, and Markus's
>>>>>>> session re NN, easy to see.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Back to the Evol IG session, As I noted, we are winnowing
>>>>>>> down the
>>> list
>>>>>>> of names.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:13, "William Drake"
>>>>>>>> <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Jeanette Hofmann
>>>>>>>>> <jeanette at wzb.eu>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> thank you for sharing your latest draft with this
>>>>>>>>> list, Subi and Marilyn.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In its current form this setup is not workable yet,
>>>>>>>>> imho. The first part has too many panelists and too
>>>>>>>>> many themes. I would suggest reducing the number of
>>>>>>>>> themes to two or three for a 90 min session.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The number of big names for this whole session seems
>>>>>>>>> overpowering to me. I don't see how a discussion
>>>>>>>>> between the panelists and the
>>> audience
>>>>>>>>> can be facilitated by moderators. If only third of
>>>>>>>>> these panelists decide to ignore the time
>>>>>>>>> restriction, the session will turn into a long and
>>>>>>>>> boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than
>>>>>>>>> once while moderating main sessions with important
>>>>>>>>> people?)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake
>>>>>>>>> proposed Samantha Dickinson and me as co-moderators.
>>>>>>>>> In the current draft,
>>> Samantha has
>>>>>>>>> got the role of a remote moderator while the
>>>>>>>>> co-organizers of
>>> this main
>>>>>>>>> session have included themselves as moderators. I
>>>>>>>>> find this a bit awkward and would prefer if the
>>>>>>>>> co-organizers would refrain from
>>> using
>>>>>>>>> their role to promote themselves for such tasks.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or
>>>>>>>>> impolite, this is really not my intention. However,
>>>>>>>>> at this late point in time I
>>> feel I
>>>>>>>>> have to be direct in my feedback.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Leaving aside the two dozen panelists issue, I have to
>>>>>>>> admit I was a little surprised by the second, given
>>>>>>>> Markus? comments about past practices, the ensuing
>>>>>>>> discussion, and Janis? suggested
>>> formulation of a
>>>>>>>> solution:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Aug 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, karklinsj at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In February we discussed that the MAG members should
>>>>>>>>> exercise self-restraint in proposing workshops and
>>>>>>>>> participating in the sessions. This understanding
>>>>>>>>> should not be interpreted as a
>>> blanket ban
>>>>>>>>> but rather invitation. If all other options turn to
>>>>>>>>> be
>>> unfeasible the
>>>>>>>>> MAG members may be called for a rescue.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is the contention here that all other options turned
>>>>>>>> out to
>>> infeasible?
>>>>>>>> There was no public discussion about the moderators
>>>>>>>> that came to this conclusion, and it?s not entirely
>>>>>>>> obvious why one would need two moderators per panel,
>>>>>>>> even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It?d be helpful to know: are the facilitators of any of
>>>>>>>> the other
>>> main
>>>>>>>> sessions also serving as their moderators?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bill _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.o
>>>>>>>>
>>>
rg
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>>>>
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.or
>>>>>>>
>>>
g
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>>
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
_______________________________________________
>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>>
_______________________________________________
>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________ Evolintgov2014
> mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>



From wjdrake at gmail.com  Fri Aug 15 22:57:26 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 11:57:26 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Draft: Main session template-Evolution of
	Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to
	NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
In-Reply-To: <53EDD014.5060503@wzb.eu>
References: <CANRKRpJYdLWV61kbkkpyRpFn339LMWcb3dRa99ErhX2ACFaJEw@mail.gmail.com>	<53E7A49B.8020604@wzb.eu>	<6D2B15D8-BFAA-48C5-8279-3B7B8520B053@gmail.com>	<BAY406-EAS3116090EF4D795293A0350D3EA0@phx.gbl>	<D00F7627.2E339%kummer@isoc.org>,
	<BAY406-EAS208ADC2E9387FD8EAFFB472D3EA0@phx.gbl>,
	<53E9C0EF.8090109@wzb.eu>
	<BAY169-W5A4DE204C1B5B08FF0E54D3EA0@phx.gbl>	<53ED1383.4050102@acm.org>
	<AD856C8B-D449-4251-A6D0-D0D551F43D99@glocom.ac.jp>
	<53EDD014.5060503@wzb.eu>
Message-ID: <A91AC8E4-4ED8-46D8-B6D6-735145D517D6@gmail.com>

Hi

The subscribers to this list are supposed to be the MAG+ team that plans and organizes the session.  At least that?s how it always worked before.  But this requires a collective commitment to working together as a team to make decisions.

Bill

On Aug 15, 2014, at 6:17 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:

> Avri and Adam,
> 
> thank you very much for these comments. I like the idea
> of forming a team to plan and organize this session, which indeed looks rather complex at the moment.
> Strengthening the IGF also means to strenghten the quality of its debates.
> 
> The relevance of NetMundial and is relationship to the IGF is on many people's mind at the moment. These are excellent conditions for an interesting and insightful discussion. We need to be ambitious to make the most of this opportunity.
> 
> jeanette
> 
> Am 15.08.14 11:00, schrieb Adam:
>> Agree with Avri's comments, and confusion.
>> 
>> Such a complex session is going to need very tight moderating,
>> weaving in both the many named participants (concern some of these
>> "vip" level people aren't going to be happy with just one or two 2
>> minute sound bites) and the "feeder" workshops.
>> 
>> We know from past attempts to involve workshops on topics related to
>> the main session that just reporting in doesn't work, more often than
>> not their intervention breaks the flow of any conversation.  Need to
>> be called on for an informed perspective, not a report of their 90
>> minute workshop. Need team supporting the moderators, and I hope we
>> can stick with the principle of MAG supporting ("convening", which is
>> it's primary task) the meeting.
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Adam
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 15, 2014, at 4:52 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Forgive me, but I find myself confused again.
>>> 
>>> I read that in principle we still don't want the MAG moderating all
>>> the sessions, but throughout the current IGF meeting MAG members
>>> appear to have good reasons for deciding to doing so.
>>> 
>>> Not sure why this is one of those circumstance since we have good
>>> non-MAG moderators standing by for each of the hemisessions.  How
>>> does two moderators for each half session make this main session
>>> better?  How do two moderators not interfere with each other?  Does
>>> each moderator take a speaking slot at the beginning.   Does one
>>> introduce and the other close?  Seems awkward to me.  I guess I
>>> just don't understand.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> And I guess that while I know how that first part of the sessions
>>> when the 19 leaders speak, will work, I am still confused about how
>>> the second part will work.  I know you patiently tried to explain
>>> it to me, but i still see lots and lots of names and lots of topics
>>> and am not clear on how it all fits together.
>>> 
>>> Also how do the feeder WS get fed in at ~ 20 speakers in
>>> effectively 80 minutes, there are at most 4 minutes to speak.
>>> 
>>> Also how are all the issues about additional speakers not yet
>>> included being handled.
>>> 
>>> As i say, when I look at all of this, I get confused.
>>> 
>>> Forgive me for continuing to ask stupid questions.
>>> 
>>> avri
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 12-Aug-14 06:40, Marilyn Cade wrote:
>>>> thanks, Jeanette.
>>>> 
>>>>> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:23:27 +0200 From: jeanette at wzb.eu To:
>>>>> evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014]
>>>>> Draft: Main session template-Evolution
>>>> of Internet Governance Ecosystem_Role of the IGF - Reaction to
>>>> NETmundial + CSTD + WSIS, ITU, other fora and Strengthening IGF
>>>>> 
>>>>> My guess is such a "master of ceremony" approach does not work
>>>>> with the Evol IG main session and its high number of speakers.
>>>>> I am not sure these two main sessions can be compared.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Jeanette
>>>>> 
>>>>> Am 12.08.14 07:59, schrieb Marilyn Cade:
>>>>>> Thanks, Markus. I guess that is how I see the role of all
>>>> moderators. Facilitating not editorializing.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:56, "Markus Kummer" <kummer at isoc.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Indeed, I am in a somewhat awkward position: I had argued
>>>>>>> against conflating the roles of facilitators and moderators
>>>>>>> and ended up, reluctantly, doing precisely that, i.e.
>>>>>>> assuming both roles. But I can claim mitigating
>>>>>>> circumstances: this was the result of a lengthy discussion
>>>>>>> on the NN list and it seemed that I was the lowest common
>>>>>>> denominator. Also, we are structuring our discussion in a
>>>>>>> way that
>>>> limits
>>>>>>> the role of the moderator to a ?master of ceremony? who
>>>>>>> introduces the discussion leaders and keeps the time, but
>>>>>>> does not engage in
>>>> substantive
>>>>>>> discussions.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Markus
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 12/08/14 07:20, "Marilyn Cade"
>>>>>>>> <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I believe some organizers are moderating in some
>>>>>>>> instances, Bill.
>>>> But w
>>>>>>>> just recently published write ups from Anriette and
>>>>>>>> materials from the IANA transition session, and Markus's
>>>>>>>> session re NN, easy to see.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Back to the Evol IG session, As I noted, we are winnowing
>>>>>>>> down the
>>>> list
>>>>>>>> of names.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 2014, at 1:13, "William Drake"
>>>>>>>>> <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Jeanette Hofmann
>>>>>>>>>> <jeanette at wzb.eu>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> thank you for sharing your latest draft with this
>>>>>>>>>> list, Subi and Marilyn.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> In its current form this setup is not workable yet,
>>>>>>>>>> imho. The first part has too many panelists and too
>>>>>>>>>> many themes. I would suggest reducing the number of
>>>>>>>>>> themes to two or three for a 90 min session.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The number of big names for this whole session seems
>>>>>>>>>> overpowering to me. I don't see how a discussion
>>>>>>>>>> between the panelists and the
>>>> audience
>>>>>>>>>> can be facilitated by moderators. If only third of
>>>>>>>>>> these panelists decide to ignore the time
>>>>>>>>>> restriction, the session will turn into a long and
>>>>>>>>>> boring monologue. (I have had this problem more than
>>>>>>>>>> once while moderating main sessions with important
>>>>>>>>>> people?)
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> And finally, I seem to remember that Bill Drake
>>>>>>>>>> proposed Samantha Dickinson and me as co-moderators.
>>>>>>>>>> In the current draft,
>>>> Samantha has
>>>>>>>>>> got the role of a remote moderator while the
>>>>>>>>>> co-organizers of
>>>> this main
>>>>>>>>>> session have included themselves as moderators. I
>>>>>>>>>> find this a bit awkward and would prefer if the
>>>>>>>>>> co-organizers would refrain from
>>>> using
>>>>>>>>>> their role to promote themselves for such tasks.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or
>>>>>>>>>> impolite, this is really not my intention. However,
>>>>>>>>>> at this late point in time I
>>>> feel I
>>>>>>>>>> have to be direct in my feedback.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Leaving aside the two dozen panelists issue, I have to
>>>>>>>>> admit I was a little surprised by the second, given
>>>>>>>>> Markus? comments about past practices, the ensuing
>>>>>>>>> discussion, and Janis? suggested
>>>> formulation of a
>>>>>>>>> solution:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 9, 2014, at 5:09 PM, karklinsj at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> In February we discussed that the MAG members should
>>>>>>>>>> exercise self-restraint in proposing workshops and
>>>>>>>>>> participating in the sessions. This understanding
>>>>>>>>>> should not be interpreted as a
>>>> blanket ban
>>>>>>>>>> but rather invitation. If all other options turn to
>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>> unfeasible the
>>>>>>>>>> MAG members may be called for a rescue.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Is the contention here that all other options turned
>>>>>>>>> out to
>>>> infeasible?
>>>>>>>>> There was no public discussion about the moderators
>>>>>>>>> that came to this conclusion, and it?s not entirely
>>>>>>>>> obvious why one would need two moderators per panel,
>>>>>>>>> even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> It?d be helpful to know: are the facilitators of any of
>>>>>>>>> the other
>>>> main
>>>>>>>>> sessions also serving as their moderators?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Bill _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.o
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
> rg
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>>>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.or
>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
> g
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>>> 
>>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>>> 
>>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
> _______________________________________________
>>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
> _______________________________________________
>>> Evolintgov2014 mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ Evolintgov2014
>> mailing list Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org




From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 18 08:23:57 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 08:23:57 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] UPDATE - EVOLVING THE IG ECOSYSTEM/ROLE OF IGF
Message-ID: <BAY169-W11108A78836538576008D21D3D40@phx.gbl>

Dear MAG and colleagues who volunteered in the Evolintgov2014 list

Attached is a finalized version of the session, taking into account comments received on the Evolintgov working list, comments received from MAG members and others from the community, and the discussions during the Paris IGF Open Consultations. 
Subi and I, as co-organizers, thank all who have contributed throughout the process.  This has perhaps had the most individual comments, undoubtedly a testiment to the interest of the MAG and other stakeholders in this topic. We have had many exchanges by email, on list, and by phone, and we thank you for this commitment to the evolution of the IG Evolution session. 
As has been commented on the list, this session is different from each of the other main sessions, and indeed, the main sessions for this IGF 2014 all have individual characteristics.  We first set the stage for all participants with the inclusion of leaders from some of the key ecosystem organizations, followed by engagement with participants in the room and remote participants. The second half of the session moves into more of a dialogue with a panel of speakers who have a history with IGF, but draws more directly on participants in the room to engage in a dialogue focused on the final set of questions. 
We have indeed had many requests to speak. We have done our best to accommodate diversity and perspective. We also recognize that the Day 0 session [Agenda not yet available] and the following day's Taking Stock/Emerging Issues session will also address Improvements to the IGF. 
We have two to four speakers who will possibly drop out, or participate remotely. 
The suggestions from Veronica to increase the role of social media in both publicizing the session and in engaging in the discussion and contribution is much welcomed, and we are discussing the idea of adding a specific twitter moderator.  Comments welcomed, and volunteer also welcomed.
Co-Moderators:We have received many suggestions, and listened to the back and forth discussion where some like co moderators; some argue that that is not a good idea and co-moderators might stop over each other or take up more time if they made statements, or tried to editorialize.  We also had considered two teams of co-moderators, and learned that was definately not supported! 
In the end, we received nominations not only on the list, but also via email and direct contact. Taking all aspects into account, including the nature of this session, and the engagement of many of the other names in other sessions, including on Day 0, our proposal is to have co-moderators, drawn from the NGO community and the government community, in particular, someone from a former IGF host and both with very current  and broad awareness of the IG ecosystem. 
Therefore, we have invited Jovan Kubalija, DIPLO and Nermine el-Saadany, Egypt - Government to take the co-moderating roles for the full session.Both are available and have confirmed their availability to work closely with the organizers and speakers to prepare the program.  
It has been an interesting experience to work on the organizing of this session and to experience the passion and enthusiam that all bring to creating sessions for the IGF, as two first time MAG members.   We have benefitted from advice from Matthew Shears, Markus Kummer, turned often to the Paris IGF open Consultation as we have digested the online comments that have come in from some MAG members. We have also had many insights offered directly.   It has been an honor to collaborate with all who have made positive and constructive comments during this planning process.  This is indeed an illustration of how the IGF process and the MAG members are open and inclusive to new MAG members contribution. 
It is our plan to post this as a finalized document to the Secretariat by 12 midnight EST, which allows for any final input.   We will of course monitor the MAG list for further, and any new feedback on the final proposal.  


Marilyn Cade and Subi Chaturvedi


 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140818/184e0f6b/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IGF Evol IG- Sept 4 - v-2 Coorganizers Proposal Aug17.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 582376 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140818/184e0f6b/attachment.docx>

From pmajor at bluewin.ch  Mon Aug 18 11:27:51 2014
From: pmajor at bluewin.ch (Peter Major)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:27:51 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] UPDATE - EVOLVING THE IG
	ECOSYSTEM/ROLE OF IGF
In-Reply-To: <BAY169-W11108A78836538576008D21D3D40@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY169-W11108A78836538576008D21D3D40@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <005101cfbaf8$fd94d900$f8be8b00$@ch>

Dear Marilyn, Subi and MAG Colleagues,

 

Thank you Marilyn and Subi for the excellent finalized version of the
session. I believe the issues are pertinent, and the speakers have the
expertise to contribute to a lively discussion. I think the choice of
Nermine and Jovan to be co-moderators is a good one: they will able to find
a way to make panelists focus on the essential points and to involve
attendees from the audience in the discussions.

 

I look forward to participating in the session.

 

Best regards,

 

Peter 

 

From: Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of
Marilyn Cade
Sent: lundi 18 ao?t 2014 14:24
To: evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org; igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
Subject: [IGFmaglist] UPDATE - EVOLVING THE IG ECOSYSTEM/ROLE OF IGF

 

Dear MAG and colleagues who volunteered in the Evolintgov2014 list

 

Attached is a finalized version of the session, taking into account comments
received on the Evolintgov working list, comments received from MAG members
and others from the community, and the discussions during the Paris IGF Open
Consultations. 

 

Subi and I, as co-organizers, thank all who have contributed throughout the
process.  This has perhaps had the most individual comments, undoubtedly a
testiment to the interest of the MAG and other stakeholders in this topic.
We have had many exchanges by email, on list, and by phone, and we thank you
for this commitment to the evolution of the IG Evolution session. 

 

As has been commented on the list, this session is different from each of
the other main sessions, and indeed, the main sessions for this IGF 2014 all
have individual characteristics.  We first set the stage for all
participants with the inclusion of leaders from some of the key ecosystem
organizations, followed by engagement with participants in the room and
remote participants. The second half of the session moves into more of a
dialogue with a panel of speakers who have a history with IGF, but draws
more directly on participants in the room to engage in a dialogue focused on
the final set of questions. 

 

We have indeed had many requests to speak. We have done our best to
accommodate diversity and perspective. We also recognize that the Day 0
session [Agenda not yet available] and the following day's Taking
Stock/Emerging Issues session will also address Improvements to the IGF. 

 

We have two to four speakers who will possibly drop out, or participate
remotely. 

 

The suggestions from Veronica to increase the role of social media in both
publicizing the session and in engaging in the discussion and contribution
is much welcomed, and we are discussing the idea of adding a specific
twitter moderator.  Comments welcomed, and volunteer also welcomed.

 

Co-Moderators:

We have received many suggestions, and listened to the back and forth
discussion where some like co moderators; some argue that that is not a good
idea and co-moderators might stop over each other or take up more time if
they made statements, or tried to editorialize.  We also had considered two
teams of co-moderators, and learned that was definately not supported! 

 

In the end, we received nominations not only on the list, but also via email
and direct contact. Taking all aspects into account, including the nature of
this session, and the engagement of many of the other names in other
sessions, including on Day 0, our proposal is to have co-moderators, drawn
from the NGO community and the government community, in particular, someone
from a former IGF host and both with very current  and broad awareness of
the IG ecosystem. 

 

Therefore, we have invited Jovan Kubalija, DIPLO and Nermine el-Saadany,
Egypt - Government to take the co-moderating roles for the full session.

Both are available and have confirmed their availability to work closely
with the organizers and speakers to prepare the program.  

 

It has been an interesting experience to work on the organizing of this
session and to experience the passion and enthusiam that all bring to
creating sessions for the IGF, as two first time MAG members.   We have
benefitted from advice from Matthew Shears, Markus Kummer, turned often to
the Paris IGF open Consultation as we have digested the online comments that
have come in from some MAG members. We have also had many insights offered
directly.   It has been an honor to collaborate with all who have made
positive and constructive comments during this planning process.  This is
indeed an illustration of how the IGF process and the MAG members are open
and inclusive to new MAG members contribution. 

 

It is our plan to post this as a finalized document to the Secretariat by 12
midnight EST, which allows for any final input.   We will of course monitor
the MAG list for further, and any new feedback on the final proposal.  

 

 

 

Marilyn Cade and Subi Chaturvedi

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140818/6db437b2/attachment.htm>

From mshears at cdt.org  Mon Aug 18 13:03:52 2014
From: mshears at cdt.org (Matthew Shears)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 18:03:52 +0100
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] UPDATE - EVOLVING THE IG
 ECOSYSTEM/ROLE OF IGF
In-Reply-To: <005101cfbaf8$fd94d900$f8be8b00$@ch>
References: <BAY169-W11108A78836538576008D21D3D40@phx.gbl>
	<005101cfbaf8$fd94d900$f8be8b00$@ch>
Message-ID: <53F231F8.70404@cdt.org>

Just like to add my support for the selection of co-moderators.

On 8/18/2014 4:27 PM, Peter Major wrote:
>
> Dear Marilyn, Subi and MAG Colleagues,
>
> Thank you Marilyn and Subi for the excellent finalized version of the 
> session. I believe the issues are pertinent, and the speakers have the 
> expertise to contribute to a lively discussion. I think the choice of 
> Nermine and Jovan to be co-moderators is a good one: they will able to 
> find a way to make panelists focus on the essential points and to 
> involve attendees from the audience in the discussions.
>
> I look forward to participating in the session.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Peter
>
> *From:*Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org] *On 
> Behalf Of *Marilyn Cade
> *Sent:* lundi 18 ao?t 2014 14:24
> *To:* evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org; igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> *Subject:* [IGFmaglist] UPDATE - EVOLVING THE IG ECOSYSTEM/ROLE OF IGF
>
> Dear MAG and colleagues who volunteered in the Evolintgov2014 list
>
> Attached is a finalized version of the session, taking into account 
> comments received on the Evolintgov working list, comments received 
> from MAG members and others from the community, and the discussions 
> during the Paris IGF Open Consultations.
>
> Subi and I, as co-organizers, thank all who have contributed 
> throughout the process.  This has perhaps had the most individual 
> comments, undoubtedly a testiment to the interest of the MAG and other 
> stakeholders in this topic. We have had many exchanges by email, on 
> list, and by phone, and we thank you for this commitment to the 
> evolution of the IG Evolution session.
>
> As has been commented on the list, this session is different from each 
> of the other main sessions, and indeed, the main sessions for this IGF 
> 2014 all have individual characteristics.  We first set the stage for 
> all participants with the inclusion of leaders from some of the key 
> ecosystem organizations, followed by engagement with participants in 
> the room and remote participants. The second half of the session moves 
> into more of a dialogue with a panel of speakers who have a history 
> with IGF, but draws more directly on participants in the room to 
> engage in a dialogue focused on the final set of questions.
>
> We have indeed had many requests to speak. We have done our best to 
> accommodate diversity and perspective. We also recognize that the Day 
> 0 session [Agenda not yet available] and the following day's Taking 
> Stock/Emerging Issues session will also address Improvements to the IGF.
>
> We have two to four speakers who will possibly drop out, or 
> participate remotely.
>
> The suggestions from Veronica to increase the role of social media in 
> both publicizing the session and in engaging in the discussion and 
> contribution is much welcomed, and we are discussing the idea of 
> adding a specific twitter moderator.  Comments welcomed, and volunteer 
> also welcomed.
>
> Co-Moderators:
>
> We have received many suggestions, and listened to the back and forth 
> discussion where some like co moderators; some argue that that is not 
> a good idea and co-moderators might stop over each other or take up 
> more time if they made statements, or tried to editorialize.  We also 
> had considered two teams of co-moderators, and learned that was 
> definately not supported!
>
> In the end, we received nominations not only on the list, but also via 
> email and direct contact. Taking all aspects into account, including 
> the nature of this session, and the engagement of many of the other 
> names in other sessions, including on Day 0, our proposal is to have 
> co-moderators, drawn from the NGO community and the government 
> community, in particular, someone from a former IGF host and both with 
> very current  and broad awareness of the IG ecosystem.
>
> Therefore, we have invited Jovan Kubalija, DIPLO and Nermine 
> el-Saadany, Egypt - Government to take the co-moderating roles for the 
> full session.
>
> Both are available and have confirmed their availability to work 
> closely with the organizers and speakers to prepare the program.
>
> It has been an interesting experience to work on the organizing of 
> this session and to experience the passion and enthusiam that all 
> bring to creating sessions for the IGF, as two first time MAG members. 
>   We have benefitted from advice from Matthew Shears, Markus Kummer, 
> turned often to the Paris IGF open Consultation as we have digested 
> the online comments that have come in from some MAG members. We have 
> also had many insights offered directly.   It has been an honor to 
> collaborate with all who have made positive and constructive comments 
> during this planning process.  This is indeed an illustration of how 
> the IGF process and the MAG members are open and inclusive to new MAG 
> members contribution.
>
> It is our plan to post this as a finalized document to the Secretariat 
> by 12 midnight EST, which allows for any final input.   We will of 
> course monitor the MAG list for further, and any new feedback on the 
> final proposal.
>
> Marilyn Cade and Subi Chaturvedi
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

-- 
Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
mshears at cdt.org
+ 44 771 247 2987

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140818/479ac989/attachment.htm>

From iza at anr.org  Mon Aug 18 19:02:00 2014
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 08:02:00 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] UPDATE - EVOLVING THE IG
	ECOSYSTEM/ROLE OF IGF
In-Reply-To: <BAY169-W11108A78836538576008D21D3D40@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY169-W11108A78836538576008D21D3D40@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKimfhHZqN4VWSUAFwd-q9NzLQbTO1YXw_JGK4xET7+6-w@mail.gmail.com>

Marilyn, Subi and all,

Thank you for your efforts.

Just one thing:

"12. Proposed to invite: Prof. Peng Hwa (Singapore)*"

He is Prof. Peng Hwa Ang, to be exact.
http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=L5mAAOYAAAAJ&hl=en

Peng Hwa is the given name and Ang is the Family name.

And do you mean he is going to be invited?
I hope so.
I sent his email address to you already, but just to make sure, I write it
here, too.

tphang <TPHANG at ntu.edu.sg>

Thanks,

izumi





2014-08-18 21:23 GMT+09:00 Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>:

> Dear MAG and colleagues who volunteered in the Evolintgov2014 list
>
> Attached is a finalized version of the session, taking into account
> comments received on the Evolintgov working list, comments received from
> MAG members and others from the community, and the discussions during the
> Paris IGF Open Consultations.
>
> Subi and I, as co-organizers, thank all who have contributed throughout
> the process.  This has perhaps had the most individual comments,
> undoubtedly a testiment to the interest of the MAG and other stakeholders
> in this topic. We have had many exchanges by email, on list, and by phone,
> and we thank you for this commitment to the evolution of the IG Evolution
> session.
>
> As has been commented on the list, this session is different from each of
> the other main sessions, and indeed, the main sessions for this IGF 2014
> all have individual characteristics.  We first set the stage for all
> participants with the inclusion of leaders from some of the key ecosystem
> organizations, followed by engagement with participants in the room and
> remote participants. The second half of the session moves into more of a
> dialogue with a panel of speakers who have a history with IGF, but draws
> more directly on participants in the room to engage in a dialogue focused
> on the final set of questions.
>
> We have indeed had many requests to speak. We have done our best to
> accommodate diversity and perspective. We also recognize that the Day 0
> session [Agenda not yet available] and the following day's Taking
> Stock/Emerging Issues session will also address Improvements to the IGF.
>
> We have two to four speakers who will possibly drop out, or participate
> remotely.
>
> The suggestions from Veronica to increase the role of social media in both
> publicizing the session and in engaging in the discussion and contribution
> is much welcomed, and we are discussing the idea of adding a specific
> twitter moderator.  Comments welcomed, and volunteer also welcomed.
>
> Co-Moderators:
> We have received many suggestions, and listened to the back and forth
> discussion where some like co moderators; some argue that that is not a
> good idea and co-moderators might stop over each other or take up more time
> if they made statements, or tried to editorialize.  We also had considered
> two teams of co-moderators, and learned that was definately not supported!
>
> In the end, we received nominations not only on the list, but also via
> email and direct contact. Taking all aspects into account, including the
> nature of this session, and the engagement of many of the other names in
> other sessions, including on Day 0, our proposal is to have co-moderators,
> drawn from the NGO community and the government community, in particular,
> someone from a former IGF host and both with very current  and broad
> awareness of the IG ecosystem.
>
> Therefore, we have invited Jovan Kubalija, DIPLO and Nermine el-Saadany,
> Egypt - Government to take the co-moderating roles for the full session.
> Both are available and have confirmed their availability to work closely
> with the organizers and speakers to prepare the program.
>
> It has been an interesting experience to work on the organizing of this
> session and to experience the passion and enthusiam that all bring to
> creating sessions for the IGF, as two first time MAG members.   We have
> benefitted from advice from Matthew Shears, Markus Kummer, turned often to
> the Paris IGF open Consultation as we have digested the online comments
> that have come in from some MAG members. We have also had many insights
> offered directly.   It has been an honor to collaborate with all who have
> made positive and constructive comments during this planning process.  This
> is indeed an illustration of how the IGF process and the MAG members are
> open and inclusive to new MAG members contribution.
>
> It is our plan to post this as a finalized document to the Secretariat by
> 12 midnight EST, which allows for any final input.   We will of course
> monitor the MAG list for further, and any new feedback on the final
> proposal.
>
>
>
> Marilyn Cade and Subi Chaturvedi
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>


-- 
                     >> Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
Japan
www.anr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140819/392d0ed5/attachment.htm>

From wjdrake at gmail.com  Tue Aug 19 01:43:36 2014
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 14:43:36 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] UPDATE - EVOLVING THE IG ECOSYSTEM/ROLE OF IGF
In-Reply-To: <BAY169-W11108A78836538576008D21D3D40@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY169-W11108A78836538576008D21D3D40@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <F2BAB186-BA8E-4CA6-9426-4B6376B26240@gmail.com>

Hi Marilyn,

Thanks for sharing this.  

One note re: feeder workshops, if you?re listing WS191: ICANN Globalization in an Evolving IG Ecosystem and WS96: Accountability challenges facing Internet governance today, you might as well include WS185: ICANN Globalization and the Affirmation of Commitments as well, inter alia as it will consider the AoC as a generalizable model of relevance in the evolving ecosystem etc.

I?m traveling and won?t be able to join the MAG call tonight, look forward to hearing of the outcomes.

Cheers

Bill

On Aug 18, 2014, at 9:23 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Dear MAG and colleagues who volunteered in the Evolintgov2014 list
> 
> Attached is a finalized version of the session, taking into account comments received on the Evolintgov working list, comments received from MAG members and others from the community, and the discussions during the Paris IGF Open Consultations. 
> 
> Subi and I, as co-organizers, thank all who have contributed throughout the process.  This has perhaps had the most individual comments, undoubtedly a testiment to the interest of the MAG and other stakeholders in this topic. We have had many exchanges by email, on list, and by phone, and we thank you for this commitment to the evolution of the IG Evolution session. 
> 
> As has been commented on the list, this session is different from each of the other main sessions, and indeed, the main sessions for this IGF 2014 all have individual characteristics.  We first set the stage for all participants with the inclusion of leaders from some of the key ecosystem organizations, followed by engagement with participants in the room and remote participants. The second half of the session moves into more of a dialogue with a panel of speakers who have a history with IGF, but draws more directly on participants in the room to engage in a dialogue focused on the final set of questions. 
> 
> We have indeed had many requests to speak. We have done our best to accommodate diversity and perspective. We also recognize that the Day 0 session [Agenda not yet available] and the following day's Taking Stock/Emerging Issues session will also address Improvements to the IGF. 
> 
> We have two to four speakers who will possibly drop out, or participate remotely. 
> 
> The suggestions from Veronica to increase the role of social media in both publicizing the session and in engaging in the discussion and contribution is much welcomed, and we are discussing the idea of adding a specific twitter moderator.  Comments welcomed, and volunteer also welcomed.
> 
> Co-Moderators:
> We have received many suggestions, and listened to the back and forth discussion where some like co moderators; some argue that that is not a good idea and co-moderators might stop over each other or take up more time if they made statements, or tried to editorialize.  We also had considered two teams of co-moderators, and learned that was definately not supported! 
> 
> In the end, we received nominations not only on the list, but also via email and direct contact. Taking all aspects into account, including the nature of this session, and the engagement of many of the other names in other sessions, including on Day 0, our proposal is to have co-moderators, drawn from the NGO community and the government community, in particular, someone from a former IGF host and both with very current  and broad awareness of the IG ecosystem. 
> 
> Therefore, we have invited Jovan Kubalija, DIPLO and Nermine el-Saadany, Egypt - Government to take the co-moderating roles for the full session.
> Both are available and have confirmed their availability to work closely with the organizers and speakers to prepare the program.  
> 
> It has been an interesting experience to work on the organizing of this session and to experience the passion and enthusiam that all bring to creating sessions for the IGF, as two first time MAG members.   We have benefitted from advice from Matthew Shears, Markus Kummer, turned often to the Paris IGF open Consultation as we have digested the online comments that have come in from some MAG members. We have also had many insights offered directly.   It has been an honor to collaborate with all who have made positive and constructive comments during this planning process.  This is indeed an illustration of how the IGF process and the MAG members are open and inclusive to new MAG members contribution. 
> 
> It is our plan to post this as a finalized document to the Secretariat by 12 midnight EST, which allows for any final input.   We will of course monitor the MAG list for further, and any new feedback on the final proposal.  
> 
> 
> 
> Marilyn Cade and Subi Chaturvedi
> 
> <IGF Evol IG- Sept 4 - v-2 Coorganizers Proposal Aug17.docx>_______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140819/b293eeb2/attachment.htm>

From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 19 07:44:52 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 07:44:52 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] Posting a corrected doc on Evolution of IG
	Ecosystem
Message-ID: <BAY169-W432513DCDD5784C20C1E9AD3D50@phx.gbl>

This version corrects an omission of a speaker on the first segment of the main session -Evolution of the IG Ecosystem/Role of IGF
Marilyn Cade 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140819/435bbfe8/attachment.htm>

From marilynscade at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 19 07:48:30 2014
From: marilynscade at hotmail.com (Marilyn Cade)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 07:48:30 -0400
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] UPDATE - EVOLVING THE IG ECOSYSTEM/ROLE OF IGF
In-Reply-To: <F2BAB186-BA8E-4CA6-9426-4B6376B26240@gmail.com>
References: <BAY169-W11108A78836538576008D21D3D40@phx.gbl>,
	<F2BAB186-BA8E-4CA6-9426-4B6376B26240@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY169-W84C13CBD688C47B91083A6D3D50@phx.gbl>

Bill, thanks, agreed. We will add. 
Other suggestions welcomed. 
Marilyn 

Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014] UPDATE - EVOLVING THE IG ECOSYSTEM/ROLE OF IGF
From: wjdrake at gmail.com
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 14:43:36 +0900
CC: evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org; igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
To: marilynscade at hotmail.com

Hi Marilyn,
Thanks for sharing this.  
One note re: feeder workshops, if you?re listing WS191: ICANN Globalization in an Evolving IG Ecosystem and WS96: Accountability challenges facing Internet governance today, you might as well include WS185: ICANN Globalization and the Affirmation of Commitments as well, inter alia as it will consider the AoC as a generalizable model of relevance in the evolving ecosystem etc.
I?m traveling and won?t be able to join the MAG call tonight, look forward to hearing of the outcomes.
Cheers
Bill


On Aug 18, 2014, at 9:23 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:Dear MAG and colleagues who volunteered in the Evolintgov2014 list
Attached is a finalized version of the session, taking into account comments received on the Evolintgov working list, comments received from MAG members and others from the community, and the discussions during the Paris IGF Open Consultations. 
Subi and I, as co-organizers, thank all who have contributed throughout the process.  This has perhaps had the most individual comments, undoubtedly a testiment to the interest of the MAG and other stakeholders in this topic. We have had many exchanges by email, on list, and by phone, and we thank you for this commitment to the evolution of the IG Evolution session. 
As has been commented on the list, this session is different from each of the other main sessions, and indeed, the main sessions for this IGF 2014 all have individual characteristics.  We first set the stage for all participants with the inclusion of leaders from some of the key ecosystem organizations, followed by engagement with participants in the room and remote participants. The second half of the session moves into more of a dialogue with a panel of speakers who have a history with IGF, but draws more directly on participants in the room to engage in a dialogue focused on the final set of questions. 
We have indeed had many requests to speak. We have done our best to accommodate diversity and perspective. We also recognize that the Day 0 session [Agenda not yet available] and the following day's Taking Stock/Emerging Issues session will also address Improvements to the IGF. 
We have two to four speakers who will possibly drop out, or participate remotely. 
The suggestions from Veronica to increase the role of social media in both publicizing the session and in engaging in the discussion and contribution is much welcomed, and we are discussing the idea of adding a specific twitter moderator.  Comments welcomed, and volunteer also welcomed.
Co-Moderators:We have received many suggestions, and listened to the back and forth discussion where some like co moderators; some argue that that is not a good idea and co-moderators might stop over each other or take up more time if they made statements, or tried to editorialize.  We also had considered two teams of co-moderators, and learned that was definately not supported! 
In the end, we received nominations not only on the list, but also via email and direct contact. Taking all aspects into account, including the nature of this session, and the engagement of many of the other names in other sessions, including on Day 0, our proposal is to have co-moderators, drawn from the NGO community and the government community, in particular, someone from a former IGF host and both with very current  and broad awareness of the IG ecosystem. 
Therefore, we have invited Jovan Kubalija, DIPLO and Nermine el-Saadany, Egypt - Government to take the co-moderating roles for the full session.Both are available and have confirmed their availability to work closely with the organizers and speakers to prepare the program.  
It has been an interesting experience to work on the organizing of this session and to experience the passion and enthusiam that all bring to creating sessions for the IGF, as two first time MAG members.   We have benefitted from advice from Matthew Shears, Markus Kummer, turned often to the Paris IGF open Consultation as we have digested the online comments that have come in from some MAG members. We have also had many insights offered directly.   It has been an honor to collaborate with all who have made positive and constructive comments during this planning process.  This is indeed an illustration of how the IGF process and the MAG members are open and inclusive to new MAG members contribution. 
It is our plan to post this as a finalized document to the Secretariat by 12 midnight EST, which allows for any final input.   We will of course monitor the MAG list for further, and any new feedback on the final proposal.  


Marilyn Cade and Subi Chaturvedi
<IGF Evol IG- Sept 4 - v-2 Coorganizers Proposal Aug17.docx>_______________________________________________
Evolintgov2014 mailing list
Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140819/d8470391/attachment.htm>

From anriette at apc.org  Tue Aug 19 07:53:04 2014
From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 13:53:04 +0200
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] UPDATE - EVOLVING THE IG ECOSYSTEM/ROLE OF IGF
In-Reply-To: <BAY169-W84C13CBD688C47B91083A6D3D50@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY169-W11108A78836538576008D21D3D40@phx.gbl>,
	<F2BAB186-BA8E-4CA6-9426-4B6376B26240@gmail.com>
	<BAY169-W84C13CBD688C47B91083A6D3D50@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <53F33AA0.1070805@apc.org>

Thanks for this Marilyn.

And as you no longer need Jeanette to moderate, I have asked her to lead
on moderating (with my support) the Setting the Scene Session. I had put
Avri down for that but she is already on other focus/main session panels
whereas Jeanette is not on any.

Anriette


On 19/08/2014 13:48, Marilyn Cade wrote:
> Bill, thanks, agreed. We will add. 
>
> Other suggestions welcomed. 
>
> Marilyn 
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Subject: Re: [Evolintgov2014] UPDATE - EVOLVING THE IG ECOSYSTEM/ROLE
> OF IGF
> From: wjdrake at gmail.com
> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 14:43:36 +0900
> CC: evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org; igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> To: marilynscade at hotmail.com
>
> Hi Marilyn,
>
> Thanks for sharing this.  
>
> One note re: feeder workshops, if you?re listing WS191: ICANN
> Globalization in an Evolving IG Ecosystem and WS96: Accountability
> challenges facing Internet governance today, you might as well
> include WS185: ICANN Globalization and the Affirmation of Commitments
> as well, inter alia as it will consider the AoC as a generalizable
> model of relevance in the evolving ecosystem etc.
>
> I?m traveling and won?t be able to join the MAG call tonight, look
> forward to hearing of the outcomes.
>
> Cheers
>
> Bill
>
> On Aug 18, 2014, at 9:23 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com
> <mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Dear MAG and colleagues who volunteered in the Evolintgov2014 list
>
>     Attached is a finalized version of the session, taking
>     into account comments received on the Evolintgov working list,
>     comments received from MAG members and others from the community,
>     and the discussions during the Paris IGF Open Consultations. 
>
>     Subi and I, as co-organizers, thank all who have contributed
>     throughout the process.  This has perhaps had the most individual
>     comments, undoubtedly a testiment to the interest of the MAG and
>     other stakeholders in this topic. We have had many exchanges by
>     email, on list, and by phone, and we thank you for this commitment
>     to the evolution of the IG Evolution session. 
>
>     As has been commented on the list, this session is different from
>     each of the other main sessions, and indeed, the main sessions for
>     this IGF 2014 all have individual characteristics.  We first set
>     the stage for all participants with the inclusion of leaders from
>     some of the key ecosystem organizations, followed by engagement
>     with participants in the room and remote participants. The second
>     half of the session moves into more of a dialogue with a panel of
>     speakers who have a history with IGF, but draws more directly on
>     participants in the room to engage in a dialogue focused on the
>     final set of questions. 
>
>     We have indeed had many requests to speak. We have done our best
>     to accommodate diversity and perspective. We also recognize that
>     the Day 0 session [Agenda not yet available] and the following
>     day's Taking Stock/Emerging Issues session will also address
>     Improvements to the IGF. 
>
>     We have two to four speakers who will possibly drop out, or
>     participate remotely. 
>
>     The suggestions from Veronica to increase the role of social media
>     in both publicizing the session and in engaging in the discussion
>     and contribution is much welcomed, and we are discussing the idea
>     of adding a specific twitter moderator.  Comments welcomed, and
>     volunteer also welcomed.
>
>     Co-Moderators:
>     We have received many suggestions, and listened to the back and
>     forth discussion where some like co moderators; some argue that
>     that is not a good idea and co-moderators might stop over each
>     other or take up more time if they made statements, or tried to
>     editorialize.  We also had considered two teams of co-moderators,
>     and learned that was definately not supported! 
>
>     In the end, we received nominations not only on the list, but also
>     via email and direct contact. Taking all aspects into account,
>     including the nature of this session, and the engagement of many
>     of the other names in other sessions, including on Day 0, our
>     proposal is to have co-moderators, drawn from the NGO community
>     and the government community, in particular, someone from a former
>     IGF host and both with very current  and broad awareness of the IG
>     ecosystem. 
>
>     Therefore, we have invited Jovan Kubalija, DIPLO and Nermine
>     el-Saadany, Egypt - Government to take the co-moderating roles for
>     the full session.
>     Both are available and have confirmed their availability to work
>     closely with the organizers and speakers to prepare the program.  
>
>     It has been an interesting experience to work on the organizing of
>     this session and to experience the passion and enthusiam that all
>     bring to creating sessions for the IGF, as two first time MAG
>     members.   We have benefitted from advice from Matthew Shears,
>     Markus Kummer, turned often to the Paris IGF open Consultation as
>     we have digested the online comments that have come in from some
>     MAG members. We have also had many insights offered directly.   It
>     has been an honor to collaborate with all who have made positive
>     and constructive comments during this planning process.  This is
>     indeed an illustration of how the IGF process and the MAG members
>     are open and inclusive to new MAG members contribution. 
>
>     It is our plan to post this as a finalized document to the
>     Secretariat by 12 midnight EST, which allows for any final input.
>       We will of course monitor the MAG list for further, and any new
>     feedback on the final proposal.  
>
>
>
>     Marilyn Cade and Subi Chaturvedi
>
>     <IGF Evol IG- Sept 4 - v-2 Coorganizers Proposal
>     Aug17.docx>_______________________________________________
>     Evolintgov2014 mailing list
>     Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org <mailto:Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org>
>     http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolintgov2014 mailing list
> Evolintgov2014 at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org

-- 
`````````````````````````````````
anriette esterhuysen
executive director
association for progressive communications
po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
anriette at apc.org
www.apc.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/evolintgov2014_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140819/a56787cb/attachment.htm>

From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Tue Aug 19 12:01:07 2014
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 01:01:07 +0900
Subject: [Evolintgov2014] [IGFmaglist] Posting a corrected doc on
	Evolution of IG Ecosystem
In-Reply-To: <BAY169-W432513DCDD5784C20C1E9AD3D50@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY169-W432513DCDD5784C20C1E9AD3D50@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <EEDB7CFD-F571-484C-B34D-53829DA295E2@glocom.ac.jp>

Hi Marilyn,

I don't see an attachment.  Could you send the relevant text so we can see who the speaker is.

Thanks,

Adam



On Aug 19, 2014, at 8:44 PM, Marilyn Cade wrote:

> This version corrects an omission of a speaker on the first segment of the main session -Evolution of the IG Ecosystem/Role of IGF
> 
> Marilyn Cade
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org