[IGFmaglist] Workshop evaluation call

[karklinsj at gmail.com]

Peter,

Such a statement will put one of the proponents in weak position. 

Discussions on merger are not going well. That is fact based on previous experience.

If the statement is sent to both, that puts the Secretariat in weak position as at one point one of two should be selected.

In my view mergers should be handled on case by case basis thru direct contact with proponents.

JK






Sent from Surface





From: Peter Dengate Thrush
Sent: ‎Wednesday‎, ‎April‎ ‎15‎, ‎2015 ‎3‎:‎53‎ ‎AM
To: igfmaglist at intgovforum.org








On 15/04/2015, at 4:24 am, Susan Chalmers <susan at chalmers.associates> wrote:





snip





Third, the MAG will have to find agreement on how we wish to handle "merger" workshop proposals. It would be good to start this conversation online, in the lead up to the May meeting.



Sorry to miss the call.


I'm not quite sure if there is disagreement about this....

I assume we are talking about competing proposals that each make the grade on the score card.




Wouldn't competing proposers get a message from the Secretariat saying: 

"The proposals from you and X have been considered and found to have potential for inclusion in the IGF programme, but have considerable overlap with each other. 




We invite you to consult with each other ( contact details provided - possibly need to get permission to release these first) to see if a single proposal can be formulated. 




Unless we hear from you by (due date) that one of the proposals has been withdrawn or a single, merged proposal agreed upon, we shall have to decline your proposal. We reserve the right to review any composite proposal for its suitability"




Perhaps older hands at this can indicate what the problems areas in this issue are?




Thanks




Peter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20150415/5e31d140/attachment.htm>