Update of latest IGF MAG mtg.

Tue May 26 09:55:06 EEST 2015

Warmest greetings to Avri.
Keep up the good work.
Cheers !
-Olévié-


2015-05-25 16:16 GMT+00:00 Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com>:

> Thanks Avri for the update.
> Keep walking and working. They say the expectation of hardwork is more
> work.
> regards
> Remmy Nweke
> @ITRealms
>
> On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
>> (The following is a basic copy of a message I sent to another list)
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Yes, the issue with main sessions is still open and a touch confusing.
>> After spending a day and half finding our way to a list of workshops we
>> started on the Main session plan.  A quick explanation on how we got to
>> the list of workshops while I am at it.
>>
>> - the top ranked 60 were automatically in.
>> - the next 10 were in unless someone had a reason for them not being
>> in.  I think in the end they may have all ended up in, though I am not
>> positive about 1 of them.  Will need to check notes and final lists to
>> be sure.
>> - for the next 30, it was a balancing process.  Based on the various
>> proportions, e.g. previous organizer : new organizer,  or developed
>> nation : developing, same old panel : other format, same old topic : new
>> topic, stakeholder group : other stakeholder groups, &c. MAG members had
>> to champion a session on the balancing perspective ( a blanket
>> acceptance of all sessions being a good sessions was made the chair)
>> for it to be considered further.  We then went through them in a
>> detailed sort of way trying to balance.  It took 2 passes through a list
>> of nominated sessions to come to the 100 selected.  The rest of workshop
>> sessions are filled by open fora, dynamic coalition (DC), best practice
>> fora (BPF), and the intersessional work.
>>
>> We also spent a fair amount of time of micromanaging, deciding whether
>> someone needed 90 minutes, 60 minutes or a flash.  Some of us objected
>> to this sillyness, but many others of us  felt the MAG was too important
>> not to know better about how much time a session should consume.  We
>> were a program committee after all. Bah, humbug!
>>
>> (re, when the final list will be posted, don't know for sure but expect
>> soon)
>>
>> Re the intersessional work,
>>
>> This is being worked in response to CSTD recommendations on IGF
>> Improvements, there is a an open team of MAG members and others working
>> on this effort (I am one of the coordinators, but have been a passive
>> coordinator so far only taking on activities Constance made me get
>> involved in).  It was slow to get going.  At this point the call is
>> coming out in the next day or so.  Basically using the working group
>> (WG) concept that is borrowed from many institutions and has been
>> modified for BPF, we will first
>>
>> ●      Launch public call for background contributions on the theme of
>> “/Policy Options for Connecting the Next Billion/”. Contributions will
>> be gathered and ultimately incorporated in the output through an
>> iterative process.
>>
>> &c.
>>
>> The call should be out shortly, a draft from 22 May is attached. i
>> have until the end of today to comment.  There was a lunch conversation
>> on the draft.
>>
>> Re The origin of the main session schedule
>>
>> In terms of main sessions, a self selected ad-hoc subgroup had met
>> during lunch on day 2 and set up a schedule that includes a half day on
>> IGF @ 10  and a full day dedicated to WSIS+10 (3 main session slots).
>> Therefore , when considering pre-session, starting and closing ceremony
>> left (3 full session), 2 full sessions (4 hemisessions) were left for
>> substantive issues.
>>
>> It seems we were going to invite the President of the General Assembly
>> (PGA) and needed to dedicate that much time to WSIS   If the PGA rejects
>> the idea, then we will get 1 thematic session back.
>>
>> Re WSIS session:
>>
>> Part of what is playing out was act 3 in the WSIS Continuation stage.
>> Starting in CSTD (which I did not attend), continuing through the 2
>> weeks of ITU Council (which I did attend) and coming into IGF was
>> a bit successful but mostly not.  ITU wanted to organize a
>> multistakeholder consultation on WSIS but was not allowed to by the
>> members states.  So now IGF was being used by those who want a
>> consultation on the future of WSIS.  Last stop before NYC.   And the
>> largest most diverse of group of participants is to be found in IGF 2015.
>> So if the PGA, it will be Denmark I believe,  is willing to come to the
>> IGF for consultations, there will be a full day of consultations in
>> Brazil.
>>
>> Re IGF @ 10
>>
>> Since the UNGA is going to decide on IGF's continuing fate this year,
>> that seemed necessary to most all of us thought it a reasonable bit of
>> scheduling.  Some think it should have more time.
>>
>> Re the  remaining 2 main session slots,  we were given a list and each
>> given a chance to argue to 2 topics on the list.  I am not sure I
>> remember the whole list, but it included
>>
>> - net neutrality
>> - internet economy
>> - human rights
>> - IANA stuff
>> - ... (couple more i did not write them down)
>>
>> In any case there was a supported recommendation that those sitting in
>> the room should not be deciding this on our own and that we should poll
>> the community.   In the end the chair decided those of us in the MAG
>> that championed a particular theme should work on a brief description
>> and we should put them out  for discussion.
>>
>> I may think of more, but this is it for pre-breakfast mind-dump on a
>> holiday morning of a day when I have a paper to finish a draft of.
>> Happy to answer questions if I can.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>> Note: on having ATTACHED a file, do not know where it could be found
>> online.  Might be able to find it on line, but did not want to spend the
>> time looking for it.  So am including the same attachment I included in
>> the original note I am copying.
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> http://www.avast.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ____
> REMMY NWEKE,  Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
> DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd [*Multiple-award winning medium*]
> (DigitalSENSE Business News
> <http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng/businessnews>; ITREALMS
> <http://www.itrealms.com.ng>, NaijaAgroNet
> <http://www.naijaagronet.com.ng>)
> Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza, Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos
> M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475, T: @ITRealms
> <http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms>
> Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria
> <https://www.facebook.com/adecadeofictreportageinnigeria‎>
> ___________________________________________________________________
> *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments
> are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended
> only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal
> responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do
> not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make
> any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
>


-- 
Olévié Ayaovi Agbenyo KOUAMI
Responsable du Projet CERGI Education
Directeur-Adjoint de KT Technologies Informatiques sarl
SG de ESTETIC  - Association Togolaise des professionnels des TIC (
http://www.estetic.tg)
ICANN-NPOC Communications Committee Chair (http://www.icann.org/ et
http://www.npoc.org/)
Membre du FOSSFA (www.fossfa.net) et Membre de de Internet Society (
www.isoc.org)
BP : 851 - Tél.: (228) 90 98 86 50 / (228) 98 43 27 72
Skype : olevie1 FB : @olivier.kouami.3 Twitter : #oleviek Lomé – Togo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20150526/f81dadfd/attachment.htm>