[Mmwg] IGF Input

[Vittorio Bertola]

Il giorno ven, 24/02/2006 alle 14.54 +0100, Avri Doria ha scritto:
> is it accepted by this group that the WG, or whatever they may be  
> called, even if set up bottom-up need to be approved?

My reply to this would be: I can trade in some freedom (ie, require WGs
to be blessed by all stakeholders through the steering committee) if I
get some authoritativeness in exchange for that (ie, results of the WGs
will be accepted and recognized by all stakeholders - even if, let's
remember, they'll not be binding).

I'm even starting to think that you could have two different types of
WGs, the "blessed" ones (ie, approved by SC) with "blessed" results, and
the "non-blessed" ones that work "in conjunction with", "under the aegis
of", etc... but are not officially part of the IGF. So you could still
discuss controversial issues even if not everyone accepts an "official"
WG on that. However, this is a complication that you could leave to
subsequent discussions.
-- 
vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<-----
http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...