[IRP] forward IGC open consultation statement & endorsement draft
Sat Feb 21 00:05:29 EET 2009
Max Senges schrieb:
> We wont have time to raise and
> tweak controversal points, so i suggest we generally endorse the IGC
I would be very careful with this, for two reasons:
1) As Craig has pointed out, if there are controversial points or no time
for discussions, we should only issue things as drafts or maybe even not
2) The Dynamic Coalitions are Multi-Stakeholder bodies. The Internet
Governance Caucus whose statement you recommend to endorse is a pure civil
society body. For the sake of long-term multi-stakeholder collaboration in
this and other coalitions, I would prefer to keeep these separated. We
can't take the coalitions and just transform them into advocacy groups.
> update the secretariate on our name change and merger process.
That of course is fine and should certainly be done.
More information about the IRP