AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: Speaker nomination process [u]

[Graciela Selaimen]

Hi, Wolfgang and all,

I understand that in the list below the issues of race and ethnicity, 
cultural diversity and communication rights were part of the *etc*. I 
suggest they are clearly pointed out in any list regarding critical themes 
within the WSIS.

Regards,
Graciela Selaimen


At 10:57 29/6/2005, you wrote:
>I think it is important that speakers have a clear message, both to themes 
>and to procedures. First we havwe to clarify what we want to communicate 
>to the summit and the other stakeholders, and then we can discuss who is 
>the most convincing person able to deliver the right message in a right tone.
>
>With regard to themes, I think we need statements for
>* financing
>* human capacity building
>* integration of MDG goals and WSIS aims&principles
>* IPR
>* Internet Governance (both instiutional aspects as well as issue aspects)
>* Gender
>* freedom of expression
>* community media
>* privacy and data protection
>* training & research (Divinas Declarration)
>* etc.
>
>With regard to procedures
>* multistakeholderism (in general, conceptual aspects)
>* follow up & implementation
>* possibilities for formalization (an enhanced but simplified version of 
>the convention idea)
>
>And again, I say this as a member of the Bureau, the receommednations has 
>to come from the Caucus and WGs. The CSB is for procedural aspects only. 
>CSB has to fight for speaking slots, but not to decide about content 
>related issues.
>
>Best
>
>wolfganbg
>
>
>
>________________________________
>
>Von: plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org im Auftrag von Robert Guerra [c]
>Gesendet: Mi 29.06.2005 14:39
>An: plenary at wsis-cs.org
>Betreff: Re: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: Speaker nomination process [u]
>
>
>
>I still think that after 2 years, it might be a good idea to revisit
>the names proposed in Geneva to see if in fact they are ok for the
>Tunis summit - or if we want to consider additional names.
>
>The CSB is the body in charge of logistics, but as a bureau member
>i'm disappointed that no planning, or discussion of any kind is
>taking place on the bureau list. Personally i would prefer that needs
>be identified well in advance so that a discussion and agreement can
>be obtained on how the logistical needs - such as speakers,
>overpasses, etc - can be taken done.
>
>You and others seem to propose that we just adopt the speakers
>suggested from the discussion 2 years ago, well that's definitely a
>possibility. Let's see what others have to say - and see if there's
>agreement. if so, fine we have a solution. If not, then let's see
>which additional names might come up. That's all I propose
>
>regards,
>
>Robert
>
>--
>Robert Guerra <rguerra at privaterra.org>
>Managing Director, Privaterra <http://www.privaterra.org>
>
>
>
>
>On 29-Jun-05, at 8:11 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote:
>
> >
> > BTW : I do hope that the long serial we had do endure before the
> > Geneva Summit for "speakers nominantions" will not happen again. I
> > know some among us who are already in the starting blocks for the
> > race for the desk ! Let's first debate on WHAT should be told to
> > the folks : this will eliminate a lot of candidates and our choice
> > will be largely facilitated. Our mailbox will appreciate it too.
>
>_______________________________________________
>Plenary mailing list
>Plenary at wsis-cs.org
>http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Plenary mailing list
>Plenary at wsis-cs.org
>http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20050629/bebab084/attachment.htm