[IRP] IRP Statement to Open Consultation for IGF 2010 [v2]
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
Fri Jan 15 16:22:29 EET 2010
I agree with Lisa. It is:
(1) a bit late to mention what good tools should be used and
(2) like opening a can of worms - selection of participation software
involves a multitude of platforms, and many many debates have happened
about that in the past, with some people favouring Open Source, other
favouring a brand, etc. etc.
I am happy with the statement that Marianne wrote. Thank you Marianne -
Olivier MJ Cr?pin-Leblond
Le 15/01/2010 13:21, Lisa Horner a ?crit :
> Thanks for this Marianne. I think it's really good and I endorse it.
> RE the recent comments about remote participation, I think it's a bit
> late to include recommendations on the specific platforms and mechanisms
> that should be used in this statement. I agree that they're quite
> complex at the moment, and that this has hampered remote participation
> in the workshops. I think this comes across in the statement. I'd
> suggest leaving it is at the moment, and then continuing the discussion
> about specific platforms and tools with the remote participation DC and
> directly ourselves in the open consultations.
> All the best,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: M I Franklin [mailto:cos02mf at gold.ac.uk]
> Sent: 14 January 2010 21:30
> To: Lisa Horner; irp
> Subject: Re: [IRP] IRP Statement to Open Consultation for IGF 2010 [v2]
> Dear all
> In order to allow time for any last input, see below; new order of
> appearance, some rephrasing, and a couple of additional comments (See
> 1c; .
> 2 e)
> Last round for comments (inclusions)!
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
More information about the IRP