[Mmwg] Re: putting working groups on the radar

[Avri Doria]

On 10 jun 2006, at 21.33, David Allen wrote:

> Seems like there are some questions.  Which governments, what  
> objections, what are possible responses, who to talk to, who has  
> that relation/connection, to have the conversation, what next  
> iteration in the thinking ... the usual.

I don't know that anyone does object.   i was arguing that a-priori  
permission was not necessary, and not that we should ignore arguments  
against.

>
> Bottom line:  when cooperation is the order of the day, forcing  
> usually produces undesirable results - attention to folks' concerns  
> has to be the focus instead.

i also don't know that there is a notion of force.  nothing can be  
forced - i know of very few entities (mostly superpowers) who think  
of other countries in terms of force.

the goal is certainly cooperation, but the question is basically how  
does one initiate something.  i tend to recommend action without  
asking permission first.  others seem to tend toward recommending  
getting permission first.  and some folks seem to be looking for a  
hybrid solution which may be the way to go.

> Only in this last exchange is there discussion of what seems like a  
> pivotal factor.  The whole point of working groups is that they be  
> multi-stakeholder.  That takes acceptance by governments, probably  
> even commitment, to work well.


this brings up other question.  when we talk about multistakeholder  
cooperations, do we need all of the stakeholders all of the time for  
an activity to be multistakeholder.  as this is a multistakeholder  
group this question may be relevant.

a.