[IGFmaglist] Reminder - MAG nominations paragraph on summary

Wed Nov 2 05:44:49 EDT 2016

Like many have already said I can see the logic on both sides for this discussion.

I know that as a representative of the technical community my nomination last year was considered by a committee before being put forward for approval by the UN and that not all applications received by the committee were put forward.  I’m not sure if other stakeholder groups form “their” nominations in the same way, and my answer below assumes that there is a fairly similar process in place in each community.

I think that once nominations are approved and submitted by the relevant communities to go forward for consideration by the UN they should be made public.  I don’t believe that the names of everyone that initially throws their hat in the ring for consideration by “their” community should be published though.  This could put people off putting themselves up for nomination if they risk losing face as a community representative if they are rejected by their own community.

Thanks
Laura

Laura Watkins (Hutchison)
Policy Executive

[Nominet_Sig_RGB_Teal]

Website<http://www.nominet.uk/> | Twitter<https://twitter.com/Nominet> | Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/nominet/>

DD: +44 (0)1865 332242    E: laura.watkins at nominet.uk<mailto:laura.watkins at nominet.uk>

Minerva House, Edmund Halley Road, Oxford Science Park, Oxford, OX4 4DQ, United Kingdom

Nominet UK. Registered in England and Wales No. 3203859

This message is intended exclusively for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, or confidential. If you are not the addressee, you must not read, use or disclose the contents of this e-mail. If you receive this e-mail in error, please advise us immediately and delete the e-mail. Nominet UK has taken every reasonable precaution to ensure that any attachment to this e-mail has been swept for viruses. However, Nominet cannot accept liability for any damage sustained as a result of software viruses and would advise that you carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment.

From: Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Renata Aquino Ribeiro
Sent: 01 November 2016 22:40
To: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
Cc: igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] Reminder - MAG nominations paragraph on summary

+1 on poll in the new fantastic website
That would make folks recall it and get used to it

Em 01/11/2016 19:08, "avri doria" <avri at acm.org<mailto:avri at acm.org>> escreveu:
Hi,

I think that they must be made public.

Sitting with a few folks who question why we even question that. Of
course it should be public, they say.  One suggestion is that we poll
the attendees at the IGF meeting and see what they say if we can't
figure it out - the question asked is why ask the self interested?

avri

On 01-Nov-16 12:22, Chengetai Masango wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Yes, we did say we would give a chance for MAG members to comment on
> whether all  nominations would be made public or not.
>
> At the moment what I am getting is that the general consensus is leaning
> towards not making them public ( Except for the CSCG.) Would this be
> correct ?
>
> The Secretariat has updated the MAG list on the website with the number
> of terms each member has served :
> http://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/mag-2016-membership
>
> Best regards
>
> Chengetai
>
>
> On 28/10/2016 21:03, Renata Aquino Ribeiro wrote:
>> Hi Marilyn and all
>>
>> Sorry, being clearer now.
>>
>> I'm not trying to change anything.
>>
>> Just reminding MAG Members group that there was a consultation
>> regarding MAG nominations process on the end of our last meeting.
>>
>> MAG members were consulted on whether they agreed or not to make the
>> nominations public.
>>
>> Some who were not on the meeting may be interested in following this
>> consultation.
>>
>> So I sent the link to our summary and pointed out that would be
>> important to read the last paragraph:
>>
>> “Finally, the IGF Secretariat noted that the MAG renewal process would
>> get started in the coming weeks, to try and ensure that the 2017 MAG
>> was in place as early as possible. There was also a short discussion
>> about whether or not names of MAG nominations should be made public or
>> not. The Secretariat was asked to bring this question to the MAG list
>> for discussion amongst the stakeholder groups as this is an important
>> and quite nuanced point. Another suggestion that was made in regards
>> to the MAG renewal process was that the Secretariat could update
>> public information on the MAG, specifically the amount of years that
>> each MAG member have served, their stakeholder group and geographical
>> region, etc. Further information on updates to the MAG renewal process
>> will be circulated to the MAG and wider community in the coming weeks,
>> and the Secretariat, together with UNDESA, will make every effort to
>> be as transparent as possible in regards to the nomination and
>> selection process. The next MAG virtual meeting is scheduled6 for 8
>> November at 14:00 UTC.”
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Renata
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 12:17 AM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>>> I could not open this and don't even understand it.
>>>
>>> The MAG nomination process is welcoming, as I understand it, by the
>>> Secretariat, and is submission to the SecGen.
>>>
>>>
>>> Can you perhaps explain what you are trying to change?
>>>
>>> M
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Igfmaglist <igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org<mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org>> on behalf of Renata
>>> Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com<mailto:raquino at gmail.com>>
>>> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 1:06 PM
>>> To: MAG-public
>>> Subject: [IGFmaglist] Reminder - MAG nominations paragraph on summary
>>>
>>> Dear all
>>>
>>> I'm just sending a reminder of the last paragraph of our last meeting
>>> summary which discussed MAG nominations process.
>>> http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/2016-October/005573.html
>>>
>>> At this time the discussion is on keeping names public or not on the
>>> process.
>>> I believe Chair and Secretariat may still send us more details of this
>>> consultation.
>>> However, as this was a last paragraph some of you may have missed it and
>>> would like to follow the discussion.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Renata
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20161102/94495aab/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 24017 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20161102/94495aab/attachment.png>