IGFWatch news

IGFWatch news

Search

Day 1 of Hyderabad IGF - soldiers, cancellations and remote participation blunders
By terminus - 3/12/2008 Despite my deep-seated differences with Nitin Desai, he is an incisive man and certainly not as naive as he often presents himself to be when uncritically extolling the IGF's virtues. At the opening ceremony today he surprised me by admitting that "essentially, this is a dialogue between two groups of people ... and we must face up to that reality.

Day 0 of Hyderabad IGF - blackouts, lunches and missing fliers
By terminus - 2/12/2008 - 2 Replies The day preceding the IGF's opening has become best known for the GigaNet academic symposium, which ran today to a slightly less than capacity audience, due to the disruption of the terrible events in Mumbai. In fact, there were a few presenters missing too - so that the poster presenters such as myself were invited to fill the missing time by briefly introducing our papers.

Some events of Internet in Hyderabad
By terminus - 22/11/2008 Here are some events I'll be involved with at the Hyderabad IGF, which I think others may also find interesting. The links go to the date and time of the event on the calendar at igf-online.net (which you may comment on with your feedback or information about the event).

What has changed for Hyderbad?
By terminus - 22/11/2008 Despite the paucity of commentary here for a couple of months, of course preparations for Hyderabad have been proceeding apace. First, the MAG met again in September to act upon the input given at the preceding day's open consultation meeting. As expected, the reactionary voices of the private sector as described in the previous post were treated as controlling by the IGF's timorous advisory group. When the meeting schedule was released later in the month, lo and behold there were no longer any sessions for "debate", nor even "dialogue and debate", but merely "open dialogue". Supposedly this was to "better reflect their nature" rather than because the IGF is terminally afraid of upsetting anyone's apple cart.

Debate at the IGF debated - and why is ICC/BASIS so scared?
By terminus - 20/9/2008 Those who have been following the IGF for a couple of years may remember that the agenda for the 2007 meeting in Rio de Janeiro once included what were called speed dialogues - essentially the governance equivalent of speed dating, in which participants intensively debate a particular issue around a table, before rotating to a new table with a new issue to consider.

The Secretariat's stranglehold on remote participation
By terminus - 7/7/2008 As some readers might know, I am one of the founders of the Online Collaboration Dynamic Coalition of the IGF, which began in early 2007 with grand ambitions to help the IGF Secretariat to drag the frankly rather embarrassing official IGF Web site into the Web 2.0 era, by opening it up to the community to collaborate on developing the IGF's online presence, drawing on a pool of information from official, host country and community sources. These plans were given short shrift by the Secretariat, who insisted that on maintaining the strict separation of information into official, host country and community silos, that had been so ineffective in Athens.

Book announcement: Multi-Stakeholder Governance and the Internet Governance Forum
By terminus - 21/5/2008 Multi-Stakeholder Governance and the Internet Governance Forum

MAG's May meeting: debates and a role call, otherwise no surprises
By terminus - 17/5/2008 The report of the May meeting of the IGF's MAG (Multistakeholder Advisory Group, formerly just Advisory Group) was posted yesterday. It is the third such report, and the first to contain a schedule listing all those who participated in the meeting, not just the appointed members. These include such shadowy figures as the "Regional Coordinators" - who had never been identified by name before now - and those who are worrying classed together as "Advisors and Others".

Steps towards Hyderabad
By terminus - 13/5/2008 The May open consultation held in preparation for the third meeting of the Internet Governance Forum, to be held this year in Hyderabad, India, finished about twelve hours ago. As usual, progress is slow, with many of the same points being raised time and again without any decisions being taken on them. Having said that, there does now seem to be a firmer resolve to increase the focus and interactivity of the Hyderabad meeting and its interconnection with the IGF's subsidiary processes.

Was my judgment on the IGF too harsh?
By terminus - 4/5/2008 Since a number of the shortcomings of the IGF Secretariat and Advisory Group that I have highlighted in my research are now being addressed, it might be argued that the verdict of my thesis (and the forthcoming book into which it has been adapted) has become too harsh. For example, I wrote of the process by which the Advisory Group was appointed for Athens, and re-appointed for Rio, that:In no sense could the Secretariat's selection of candidates for the Advisory Group, in a closed process pursuant to criteria that were never published, be described as consensual or democratic.

© 2017 Jeremy Malcolm and contributors. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike Licence. Powered by WebGUI.