[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

[Avri Doria]

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 ³master of ceremony² 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 peopleŠ)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 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 Markus¹ comments about past
>> >>>> practices, the ensuing discussion, and Janis¹ 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 it¹s not entirely obvious why one would need two
>> >>>> moderators per panel, even if the panel has a dozen people (yikes!).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It¹d 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
>