[Mmwg] Re: [governance] Linking process to themes

[Robert Guerra]

Bertrand:

I like the idea you propose having BoF & Poster sessions at the IGF
Athens meeting.

In regards to how to organize them, let me suggest you look at
barcamp.org - a highly innovative approach that is being used by
technology start-ups to organize meetings and presentations.


http://barcamp.org/
http://barcamp.org/TorCampDemoCamp4

Might I suggest that future CS meetings both at the IGF and other
post-WSIS processes use a similar tool. It would save time and allow us
to harness the power of the very tools we many of us use internally to
help organize our meetings.

regards

Robert



Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
> Milton,
>  
> As I said in a previous response to Bill, I agree the capacity to
> form Working groups - or maybe initially Discussion Groups or Interest
> groups - is what will make the difference between the IGF as a mere
> annual get-together and it being a real, useful process.
>  
> I suggest this is an issue that could be discussed more thoroughly *in
> the mmwg* in the perspective of the preparation of the May meeting, to
> suggest preliminary rules for the formation of such groups.
>  
> Two suggestions in that context for the meeting in Athens :
> - *BoF (Birds of a Feather") meetings* : each annual event, including
> the IGF in Athens should allow some time, as suggested by Bill, for open
> parallel sessions more or less formal, initiated by
> stakeholders according to the concept of BoF Meetings used in many
> professional conferences and the IETF ("Birds of a Feather" meetings are
> explained here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BoF). The space where the
> Athens meeting will take place should therefore have a number of small
> rooms available that could be reserved by people to hold such meetings.
> This could actually form an important *capacity-building component of
> the IGF* and could be presented as such, if background information is
> posted online for people to understand the various dimensions of the issue.
> - A *Poster Session* *for issues not retained on the Agenda of the first
> IGF* : during the February consultations, I suggested (see point 11 in
> my intervention at :
> http://www.intgovforum.org/contributions/Contribution_BPC_Feb_17_06%5B1%5D.pdf)
> :
> *
> 
>     11) A poster session in Athens for issues not retained at this first
>     annual meeting
> 
> *During the Athens meeting, stakeholders who submitted issues not
> retained for the main thematic sessions would be given the opportunity
> to make short 3-5 minutes interventions in a special poster session of 2
> hours in order to further feed the agenda-setting process. This
> innovative session (in a format already implemented in the Tokyo
> regional conference in 2003) element is useful to introduce for two
> reasons:
> - to keep engaged actors who care about a theme that was not retained
> and would like to see it taken into account in the future
> - to facilitate the early identification of emerging themes, in
> accordance with the very mandate (para 72 of the Tunis Agenda) of the IGF
> 
> This poster session concept (that can also include the reporting of
> parallel sessions) is very important to guarantee that even if there is
> a limit on the number of issues addressed in formal thematic sessions in
> Athens (I still support 4- 6 rather than 3), other issues are not
> prevented from being at least mentionned during the first event.
> 
> Ideally, this Poster Session would take place the last day in the
> morning for instance to allow some reporting on the BoF sessions
> described above and the announcements related to the setting up of
> bottom-up Interest/Discussion Groups for the period post-Athens.
> 
> Best
> 
> Bertrand 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> On 3/25/06, *Milton Mueller* <mueller at syr.edu <mailto:mueller at syr.edu>>
> wrote:
> 
> 
>     >>> "William Drake" <drake at hei.unige.ch <mailto:drake at hei.unige.ch>>
>     3/24/2006 1:54:54 AM >>>
>     >So process and substance demands are intrinsically linked.
>     >If we're going to send them multiple topical suggestions and
>     >say these are all important to us, I think we should also a) call
>     > for at least one and maybe two days in Athens being devoted
>     >to parallel workshops, any outputs of which could then
>     >be brought into the plenary sessions; and b) an agreement that,
>     >per MMWG, topical working groups can be formed bottom-up,
>     >formally linked to the IGF, work virtually, and present any
>     >outputs and recommendations at Rio.  Where
>     >there's consensus, the Athens workshops could serve as the
>     >boot-up moment for the creation of such groups.
> 
>     Drake's comments are very important and on point, I endorse them and
>     hope that everyone here follows this path.
> 
>     Dr. Milton Mueller
>     Syracuse University School of Information Studies
>     http://www.digital-convergence.org
>     http://www.internetgovernance.org <http://www.internetgovernance.org>
> 
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     governance mailing list
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>     https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mmwg mailing list
> mmwg at wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mmwg

-- 
Robert Guerra <rguerra at privaterra.org>
Managing Director, Privaterra
Tel +1 416 893 0377 Fax +1 416 893 0374