[Bureau] RE: Message on registration and overpasses
RunningToddler
amkt at apcwomen.org
Tue Nov 25 13:57:18 GMT 2003
Hello all,
Can we quickly come to a decision on this? I believe Renate is busy organising her CONGO event and may not be able to respond as fast.
These 30 names per family, would that mean that all passes would be allocated and none for first-come first-served basis?
We cannot afford to ask CS participants to find a home with families now when we're supposed to be submitting names already. We cannot afford any kind of time-engaging process. This would mean having to double-check if names overlap in anyway from all of us. Why are names necessary in the first place since these are, if I'm not mistaken, daily passes? Why is there a need to prioritise these names?
Louise? Liliane? Please help clarify and also explain what happened to the proposal first placed on the table through Renate's lead.
Warm regards,
Angela
----- Original Message -----
From: Olinca Marino
To: bureau at wsis-cs.org ; bureau at wsis-cs.org
Cc: bureau at geneva2003.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 3:37 AM
Subject: RE: [Bureau] RE: Message on registration and overpasses
Dear All,
I really think "the size" is a considerable problem to share overpasses taking as "basis" the families:
- in one hand, we have families with 2 or 3 persons or even without active members (only with the name), and
- in the other hand, we have "families" with more than 60 persons.
regards,
Olinca
At 12:30 p.m. 24/11/2003 -0800, John R. Gagain Jr. wrote:
Dear All,
I agree with and support Nick's sentiments below. Content groups / caucuses
have been created, re-created, canceled, etc all on an ad-hoc on-going basis
throughout the WSIS process. YJ, you mention that these groups have been
"more active", but I believe you must be clear and state "substantively
actively" and I dont think that we should say that any one entity has been
more active or better. All mechanisms have played their role in an extreme
effort to collaborate.
Additionally, the "substantively active" has been due to the fact that since
the very beginning we have established that the CSB would not involve itself
in substance and to this day, its only involvement in such has been the
presence of the CT Working Group as an observer on the WSIS Civil Society
Bureau. The role of the CSB has proved to be invaluable and increasingly
served to fill an important role since the Paris Intersessional. Please do
not downplay that role due to its mandate and limits on addressing
substance.
Sincerely,
John R. Gagain Jr.
Think-Tanks Focal Point
WSIS Civil Society Bureau
j.gagain at funglode.org
-----Mensaje original-----
De: bureau-admin at wsis-cs.org [mailto:bureau-admin at wsis-cs.org]En nombre
de Nick Moraitis
Enviado el: Sunday, November 23, 2003 10:23 PM
Para: bureau at geneva2003.org; bureau at wsis-cs.org
CC: plenary at wsis-cs.org
Asunto: [Bureau] RE: Message on registration and overpasses
Hi all,
Not terribly fussed on this, but my personal input would be that I
generally feel like it should be kept simple - with the families
responsible alone. I don't know what the basis of Caucuses and Working
Groups is or how new ones are created and recognized by others as
existing. I do get the impression that they are generally considered
"content groups". On the other hand, the definition, role and number of
actors within the Bureau and the role of the Secretariat seems clearer,
more logistic-oriented, and more suited to this task - as per the
descriptions on:
http://www.wsis-cs.org/cs-overview.html
I suggest that the agreed families (perhaps excluding the Regional
families) should "enable any civil society entity to find a 'home'" and
if not the Secretariat should keep some extra passes over for those on a
first come-first-serve basis who "chose not to associate with some or
all of the above entities".
Louise, one question - if the youth caucus were to submit a list of
names for 30 people for the Opening Session to assist with security and
advance planning, when would be the last date to submit such a list, and
what possibility would there be to change names? (considering for
example, any unforseen but probably likely complications with travel and
visas for a few participants?).
Cheers
Nick
Youth Family/Caucus facilitator
-----Original Message-----
From: bureau-request at geneva2003.org
[mailto:bureau-request at geneva2003.org] On Behalf Of YJ Park
Sent: November 24, 2003 1:01 AM
To: bureau at geneva2003.org; bureau at wsis-cs.org
Cc: plenary at wsis-cs.org
Subject: Re: Message on registration and overpasses
Thank Sean for pointing this out.
As it has been observed in the WSIS civil society process,
more active partcipation and coordination has been done
through working groups and caucuses in cooperation with
CS content and theme group on the volunteer basis.
In principle, CS family structure in the civil society proposed
by CSD is supposed to play a role of organizer or coordinator
but most substantial coordination has been made by volunteers
from civil society plenary so far.
As Sean addressed, it seems more natural for CS working
groups or caucuses to handle this issue in conjunction with family.
Therefore, the following proposal sounds more reasonable than
only family inputs.
Working groups and Caucuses: 27 of these each with 8 = 216
(assumption that many family members are part of WGs)
Bureau Families 21 families each with 4 = 84
Content & Themes group 5
Total pre allocated: 305
First comes first served = 295
One more clarification about the number of passes. Technically,
as requested if 22 family provides 30 members, it is 660. How many
passes are we talking about here? I thought 295.
YJ
----- Original Message -----
From: Sean O Siochru
To: bureau at geneva2003.org ; bureau at wsis-cs.org
Cc: plenary at wsis-cs.org
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2003 11:11 PM
Subject: Re: Message on registration and overpasses
Louise
Renata's suggestions of November 6th, developed by a group of us,
proposed that passes be made available as follows:
Distribution:
<Working groups and Caucuses: 27 of these each with 8 = 216 (assumption
that many family members are part of WGs)
<Bureau Families 21 families each with 4 = 84
<Content & Themes group 5
<Total pre allocated: 305
<First comes first served = 295.
Why are families being asked to come with 30 names each? Why not the
working groups and caucuses?
Sean
At 17:08 21/11/2003 +0100, Louise Lassonde wrote:
Dear Bureau members,
Registration
We would like to inform you of the state of registration as of today.
So far, 3000 Civil Society participants have registered and we expect
25% more to come in the next weeks;
1000 governement, we expect at least 2X more to come in the next weeks.
Overpasses
600 overpasses have been allocated to Civil Society and we have
requested 150 more for the World Electronic Media Forum.
Renate Bloem (NGO Family) made a proposal on the 6th November on the
allocation of overpasses.
In addition, it seems appropriate for the opening ceremony to have a
name list well in advance for security reasons. May we ask each family
to draw up a list of 30 names (in order of priority).
Best regards,
----------------------------------------------------
Cher Membre du Bureau,
Enregistrement
Nous aimerions vous informer de létat davancement de lenregistrement
au jour daujourdhui.
Pour le moment,3000 participants de la société civile se sont
enregistrés
et nous
prévoyons encore 25% dinscriptions supplémentaires durant les
prochaines semaines ; 1000 représentants des gouvernements, nous
prévoyons au moins le double pour les prochaines semaines.
Laissez-passer
600 laissez-passer ont été alloués à la société civile et nous en avons
demandé 150 de plus pour le World Electronic Media Forum.
Renate a fait une proposition le 6 novembre concernant lallocation des
laissez-passer.
De plus, il semble approprié pour louverture de la cérémonie davoir à
lavance une liste de noms pour des questions de sécurité.
Pourrions-nous demander à chaque famille de dresser une liste de 30 noms
(par ordre de priorité).
Meilleures salutations
Savita
--
The Secretariat
Civil Society Division
World Summit on the Information
Society
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.530 / Virus Database: 325 - Release Date: 22/10/2003
___________________________________________________
Seán Ó Siochrú Central office: tel: +353 1 473 0599 fax: +353 1 473
0597
NEXUS Research Mobile: +353 87 20 48 150
14 Eaton Brae Direct office tel: +353 1 272 0739 fax: +353 1 272 0034
Shankill
Co. Dublin e-mail: sean at nexus.ie
Ireland Web site: http://www.iol.ie/nexus
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.530 / Virus Database: 325 - Release Date: 22/10/2003
_______________________________________________
Bureau mailing list
Bureau at wsis-cs.org
http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/bureau
_______________________________________________
Bureau mailing list
Bureau at wsis-cs.org
http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/bureau
LaNeta S.C.
http://www.laneta.apc.org
Información desde las organizaciones civiles en México.
LaNeta S.C. es miembro de la Asociación para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones, APC
http://www.apc.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/bureau/attachments/20031125/4dba6546/attachment.htm
More information about the Bureau
mailing list