[IGFmaglist] Virtual MAG meeting VI - Draft summary report

[Angelic del Castilho]

Dear Mark,

The idea you propose makes a lot of sense to me.

Angelic Alihusain-del Castilho

*Angelic Caroline Alihusain-del Castilho*

*POB 3036**Wanica*
 *Suriname*


On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 6:30 AM, CARVELL, Mark <
Mark.Carvell at culture.gsi.gov.uk> wrote:

> Dear Chengetai
>
>
>
> My apologies if you have already considered the pros and cons but I think
> it is preferable for the host country workshops and thematic sessions
> (which if I understand correctly would in effect be similar to national IGF
> activities) to be conducted in a *separate *programme outside the global
> IGF programme – perhaps in the run up period to the IGF. This would avoid
> the serious risk of confusion as to process, rationale and objectives for
> these sessions vis-à-vis the IGF sessions.  There is also a risk of
> possible concerns being generated about their impact on the availability of
> facilities and resources during the four days of this global event.
>
>
>
> Kind regards
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> Mark Carvell
>
> DCMS: Global Internet Governance Policy
>
> United Kingdom Government
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org] *On Behalf
> Of *William Drake
> *Sent:* 11 July 2014 10:04
> *To:* Chengetai Masango
> *Cc:* MAG-public
> *Subject:* Re: [IGFmaglist] Virtual MAG meeting VI - Draft summary report
>
>
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> Thanks Chengetai, the report captures the discussion well.  I would just
> like to raise a couple questions for the MAG concerning the “Host Country
> Workshops.”
>
>
>
> First, someone suggested—and I alas can’t remember whether it was on the
> MAG call or off—that it might be good to call these “Hosts Country
> Sessions” so as to indicate that they’re a different, special category of
> events.  This would seem a sensible way to indicate that they were not part
> of the MAG process and would not in any way diminish their standing.
>  Otherwise, e.g., proponents of workshop proposals that did not get slots
> on the program etc. might raise eyebrows.
>
>
>
> Second, if they are understood to be a bit different in kind, would it
> make sense to be a bit flexible about the conclusion stated in the report
> that "MAG members underlined that these sessions need to be
> multistakeholder in nature and in line with other agreed upon guidelines
> for IGF sessions” ?  For example, while we normally would require a certain
> geographic diversity, if the host wanted to do something nationally or
> regionally focused, would we object?  Similarly, as I mentioned on the
> call, the host has invited a local university to organize an
> academic-oriented session, which I’ve been asked to help with.  It is a bit
> difficult to organize an academic-oriented session on a multistakeholder
> basis—a panel could have maybe 1 or 2 academics but the rest would be from
> other groupings, and they’d talk about the state of academic research on
> Internet governance?  We need guidance here as the local university didn’t
> understand there to be applicable guidelines and is already reaching out to
> academic speakers.  So to avoid confusion and discomfort, should we say
> that “Sessions” can be depart a bit from "agreed upon guidelines” as long
> as there’s transparency/reporting etc?  Whatever the feeling is either way,
> it’d be good to get this clarified before their planning proceeds further.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> On Jul 10, 2014, at 5:57 PM, Chengetai Masango <CMASANGO at unog.ch> wrote:
>
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> Please find attached the draft summary report for the MAG virtual meeting
> VI.
>
> The Secretariat intends to post the summary report on Monday. Please let
> me know if they are any suggested amendments
>
> The audio file is available here :
> https://intgovforum.webex.com/intgovforum/ldr.php?RCID=2700324d59e8007f6b853dd7a5b75815
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Chengetai
>
>
> <Virtual.MAG.Meeting.VI.8.July.Draft.Summary.Report.v2.doc>_______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>
>
>
> This email was scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus
> service supplied by Vodafone in partnership with Symantec. (CCTM
> Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your
> organisations IT Helpdesk.
> Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
> recorded for legal purposes.
>
> ****************************************************************************
> This email and its contents are the property of the Department for
> Culture, Media and Sport.
> If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please delete it.
> All DCMS e-mail is recorded and stored for a minimum of 6 months
> The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government
> Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Vodafone in partnership
> with Symantec. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) This email has been
> certified virus free.
> Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
> recorded for legal purposes.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20140711/8a07b12c/attachment.htm>