[CS Bureau] Speakers and Format of Tunis Summit

Tue Mar 22 14:48:29 GMT 2005

Francis,

Thanks for the contribution. I know we are all into very 
tight deadlines. But may I respectfully ask you to read 
carefully what you quote before jumping in with abrasive 
comments ? Nowhere was it suggested to "call to the 
heteroclit association of the CSB, the WGWM, the CT, and 
the "Strategy Group" to decide on content issues and choice 
of speakers".

The exact formula was : a possible "joint mandate between 
CSB, WGWM and Content and Themes to design an appropriate 
drafting process for these statements". TO DESIGN A DRAFTING 
PROCESS, not to take decisions on the substance ! let alone 
on speakers. 

The enumeration was just an attempt to make sure I do not 
forget any of the groups that are somewhat relevant to the 
issues I was raising. I was trying to be inclusive, without 
prejudging the appropriate forum to discuss this.

Your CTB proposal may be a way to go; and you suggest 
yourself that the WGWM should have taken this issue. My only 
concern is that we do not keep those issues for ... too late.

So can we move forward without using terms like confusion and 
address the issues I tried to raise in the complete mail ? 
(as you suppressed the rest of the comments, nobody reading 
your mail can possibley know what this was all about).

I therefore repeat the initial questions :

Quote :

"""1) About CS speaking slots :

- 12 speakers is indeed a very limited number 
- designation of the speakers by CS is a welcome evolution - 
even if we know it is hard. Will there be a formal 
confirmation ?
- CS means accredited CS entities to the WSIS process; 
- speakers are less important than CONTENT ; the question 
is : what does CS want to say ?

Therefore, there is a key discussion to hold within CS on :
- what kind of statements it wants to make (general 
intervention on the process, formal Declaration, 
announcement, initiative ....?) 
- on what topics (process, thematic ...)
- with what consultation and drafting process (this is the 
most important, and a good opportunity to cristallize the 
methods presently under discussion)

Consequence : there may be a joint mandate between CSB, WGWM 
and Content and Themes to design an appropriate drafting 
process for these statements. Could also be the purpose of 
the Stategy Group that Ralf was proposing to relaunch.

Similar discussion on the panels. There is a big challenge to 
avoid the mess we faced in preparing for Geneva. By the way, 
should not here be a collective effort by civil society to 
organize a series of events in the parallel conference 
space ? Each Caucus could for instance organize a roundtable 
on its own topic and invite actors to participate.

Renate wrote : "The process of identification of CS speakers 
should ideally be finalized by the end of PrepCom III". Am I 
right in understanding this as being a deadline for CS to 
design its process and not a way to say that the WSIS ES will 
finalize a method for that date ?""""

Best

Bertrand

---- Original message ----
>Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:36:15 +0100
>From: "Dr. Francis MUGUET" <muguet at wtis.org>  
>Subject: Re: [CS Bureau] Speakers and Format of Tunis 
Summit  
>To: Bertrand de LA CHAPELLE <lachapelle at openwsis.org>
>Cc: bureau at wsis-cs.org, workingmethods at wsis-cs.org
>
>
>Hello everybody
>
>I have been too busy recently to read CS mails
>, just reading this one, by chance.
>> 
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> Consequence : there may be a joint mandate between CSB, 
WGWM 
>> and Content and Themes to design an appropriate drafting 
>> process for these statements. Could also be the purpose of 
>> the Stategy Group that Ralf was proposing to relaunch.
>> 
>If the CSB has a clear mandate concerning procedural issues,
>the call to the heteroclit association of the CSB, the WGWM,
>the CT, and the "Strategy Group" to decide on content issues
>and choice of speakers illustrates the growing confusion and
>the lack of a proper structure.
>
>This is why I proposed the formation of a Content & Theme 
Bureau
>(CTB). When discussing with practical problems,
>it seems more appropriate than ever.
>
>Best regards
>
>Francis
>
>
>PS since I have no time to read mail
>recently, I wonder if the the WGWM did consider and analyze 
the CTB
>proposition
>
>
>-- 
>
>------------------------------------------------------
>Francis F. MUGUET  Ph.D
>World Tour of the Information Society (WTIS)
>muguet at wtis.org
>
>UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org
>
>World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS)
>Civil Society Working Groups
>Scientific Information :  http://www.wsis-si.org  chair
>Patents & Copyrights   :  http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair
>Financing Mechanismns  :  http://www.wsis-finance.org web
>
>Director
>Scientific Information Developement Laboratory :
>Knowledge Networks and Information Society
>ENSTA
>32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE
>Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19  Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82
>muguet at ensta.fr   http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet
>
>MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals
>Associate Publisher
>http://www.mdpi.org   http://www.mdpi.net
>muguet at mdpi.org       muguet at mdpi.net
>
>------------------------------------------------------