Mazzone, Giacomo mazzone at ebu.ch
Sun Apr 27 11:02:17 UTC 2014

Dear Janis,
i agree that there are objective obstacles to make immediately a change in the IGF habits, because resources (and most of the rest ) has not changed, but we cannot miss the opportunity provided by the Net Mundial in supporting the role of the IGF.
There are various things that could (and must) done right now: you know better than me which ones.
I simply suggest a couple of those:

1.       An immediate extraordinary meeting of the donors (beside the Paris open consultation) where those that were more vocal on the IGF role could be asked to pass from theory to action (EC, Brazil, India, etc.)

2.       Devote one or two plenaries of Istanbul IGF to some of the issues that Net Mundial indicated as needing more discussion : Net Neutrality, Responsibility of ISP, etc. instead than having the usual generic ones (Openness, Access, etc.)

3.       Streamline in function of these main topics the workshops that could help to build these sessions.

These things could be made within the current available resources, within the current timeframe, using the coming Paris meeting as the platform where such decision could be taken.
If you want, I’m ready to work to put in writing these (and other) proposal to make discussion more concrete and start to change the perception of the IGF as talk-shop only.
Bests from a sunny Rome on the way to a grey Geneva…


From: discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org] On Behalf Of karklinsj at gmail.com
Sent: dimanche 27 avril 2014 08:04
To: Avri Doria; discuss at 1net.org; internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org


I would like to comment on your “…it is time to IGF MAG to through off its self imposed limitations ….”
Agreeing that IGF needs to find a way to demonstrate more tangible outcome of its work, I doubt that NetMundial experience will be applied in 2014/2015 editions. There are several reasons for that:

  *   NetMundial was focused on 2 issues - IGF is broad ranging discussion

  *   Purpose/aim of both meetings were different

  *   Drafting of the Final statement started well in advance of NetMundial

  *   NetMundial had far more resources in terms of Secretarial support (HL Committee, Bureau)

That said, I hope that IGF will be able to demonstrate that things happen as a result of IGF elsewhere. You know that I launched a call for a voluntary information submission:

The Internet Governance Forum was created by the World Summit on the Information Society as a multistakeholder discussion platform on Internet governance related issues. The goals of the IGF are to provide a platform for information exchange, identify emerging challenges and possible solutions to addressing them, provide capacity building, identify and disseminate best practices and forge partnerships for concrete actions.
Over the past few years, some sceptics of the IGF have suggested that no actions have been taken and that no decisions are made at the IGF - that it is just a “talk shop”.
In order to dissipate those doubts about the “action orientation” of the IGF it would be useful to collect data about concrete actions and decisions that have been taken by different stakeholders as a result of the engagement and discussions of Internet related issues at the various IGFs (international, regional or national).
In this respect, I would like to invite all of those organizations and institutions that would be willing to share information, on a voluntary basis, about concrete decisions or actions that have been taken as a result of engagement during the current mandate of the IGF the 2011, 2012 and 2013 IGFs to do so by sending brief information to the IGF Secretariat (discussion_questions at intgovforum.org<mailto:discussion_questions at intgovforum.org>) by 30 June 2014. The Secretariat will compile all information received and will present a synthesized report at the Istanbul IGF.
Thank you for your participation

Janis Karklins
Interim Chair of the MAG

The IGF Secretariat will compile all submissions and I intend present them at the opening of Istanbul IGF meeting. I hope that report will dissipate, at least partially, perception that IGF is merely a talk-shop.
With greetings from sunny and warm Riga

Sent from Surface

From: Avri Doria<mailto:avri at acm.org>
Sent: ‎Saturday‎, ‎April‎ ‎26‎, ‎2014 ‎10‎:‎59‎ ‎PM
To: discuss at 1net.org<mailto:discuss at 1net.org>, internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org<mailto:internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org>


And beyond exegesis and spin on the document we should try to import
some of those techniques into the IGF so that it can also learn how to
produce some outcomes, e.g. inputs from IGF to other Ig organizations.

Following the lead of NetMundial, it is time for the IGF MAG to throw
off its self imposed limitation of being merely a program committee so
it can make recommendations to the UNSG on how to turn the IGF into an
organization that can actually produce results.  While it is true that
the IGF has achieved a little just by existing, at this point if it
wants to remain viable it needs to move beyond its infancy and become a
useful organization.

In addition to some of the important work done by NetMundial in bridging
the gap between the Internet and Human Rights and opening the door to
discussions on revising the government defined roles and
responsibilities of the actors in the Internet ecosystem from 2003, it
has shown us that it is possible for a multistakeholder organization to
produce outcomes.  It is now time for the IGF to figure out how to do
the same.

Additionally, the NetMundial has sent some tasks the IGF's way.  I look
forward to work on such issues as Net Neutrality at IGF2014.

The mission of the IGF has been given a real push by NetMundial, I hope
we don't waste the opportunity.


On 26-Apr-14 16:36, John Curran wrote:
> On Apr 25, 2014, at 9:58 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com
<mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com%0b>> <mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>> I think the opportunity ahead is how to further examine what the
>> "statement of Sao Paolo" says and how to continue work, especially at
>> IGF,  but not only there.
> Indeed.
> /John
> Disclaimer: My views alone.
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org<mailto:discuss at 1net.org>
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

discuss mailing list
discuss at 1net.org<mailto:discuss at 1net.org>

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by the mailgateway
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140427/b766e2d7/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list