[IGFmaglist] When you have not been asked...

[William Drake]

Hi Paul

I followed pretty much the same approach.  The deadline was clearly stated well in advance, so organizers should have been able to indicate at least “contacted,” if not “confirmed.”   It would have been very unfair to proponents who did the hard work of complying in time with the stated requirements to give equal credit to proponents who did not.

In future iterations these kinds of detailed evaluation approach issues might be something to discuss and agree a common approach toward.

Best

Bill


On May 11, 2014, at 1:05 PM, Paul Wilson <pwilson at apnic.net> wrote:

> Hi Anriette,
> 
> I think by asking the questions we've made it clear that we are interested in which panellists have been actually invited and which have confirmed, and it goes without saying that truthful answers are expected.
> 
> In my reviews, I considered the proposed panel along with all the other considerations, and my thinking went along these lines:
> 
> - credit to a proposal which had a good panel, including new and interesting speakers as opposed to the usual suspects (as interesting as those people are).
> 
> - credit to a proposal which stated that most or all panelists were invited AND confirmed.
> 
> - no credit (or negative) where external speakers (not from the apparent organisers) were not confirmed or not even invited.  No matter how impressive the proposed lineup.
> 
> 
> I did no form of checking with anyone named for panels, but I would certainly want to reject any proposal which had systematically misrepresented that speakers were invited or confirmed when they were not (while giving the benefit of the doubt in case of one or two "errors").
> 
> If we can revisit this for the future proposal process, I'll send some ideas separately.
> 
> Paul.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/05/2014, at 12:12 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:
> 
>> Dear all
>> 
>> I want to note that there are some proposals in which I have been listed as a co-proposer, or presented without the organisers having asked me to play either role.
>> 
>> So don't be entirely surprised if you see my name on a proposal that does not look terribly well-developed.
>> 
>> Do any other people on the MAG find themselves in this position?
>> 
>> Anriette
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> anriette esterhuysen 
>> anriette at apc.org
>> 
>> executive director, association for progressive communications
>> 
>> www.apc.org
>> 
>> po box 29755, melville 2109
>> south africa
>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

***********************************************
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
***********************************************