[Rigf_program] Further topic for the Tokyo agenda

[Paul Wilson]

I agree, a session on country IGF activities would be a good thing.  Can we find out more precisely how many of those there will be?  

I think the structure of the session deserves some thought - because the least interesting is to have a series of sequential free-form reports, without preparation or structure.  Perhaps a panel-format with discussion organised by theme?  

Maybe we could have discussion not only of the content but of the form and functioning of the IGF itself - i.e. gathering views on ongoing direction/improvement of the event, and the whole "IGF system" such as it is.

If this is planned in advance clearly enough, then that could also inform the national processes (or at least the panelists) in advance of the meetings themselves (those that are yet to happen). 

paul


On 12/05/2012, at 11:01 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote:

> Very good idea, Keith and Kuo Wu.
> 
> Izumi
> 
> 2012年5月12日土曜日 Keith Davidson keith at internetnz.net.nz:
> Fully agree with these comments Kuo Wu. If we could have a "reporting in
> session" from any countries and territories who have issues to raise. I
> would think it would only be 5 minutes per country or per "in-country
> IGF" - raising only the 3 or 4 most significant issues for the local
> Internet community?
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Keith
> 
> On 11/05/2012 5:07 p.m., Wu Kuo wrote:
> > My comment is : It is fine for those countries have its' own IGF to report their concern and comment. But it is also fine to figure out the regional common interest or special issues. If you can share how NZ work on your own IGF, it is good experience sharing to others. :-)
> >
> > Kuo Wu
> >
> >
> >
> > 從我的 iPhone 傳送
> >
> > Keith Davidson<keith at internetnz.net.nz>  於 2012/5/11 12:20 寫道：
> >
> >> Hi Peng Hwa and all,
> >>
> >> I was wondering if it might be considered useful to have a session
> >> marked down for reporting in on other "in-country" or sub-regional IGFs
> >> from around the AP region? For example, NZ is convening its IGF the week
> >> before the APrIGF - as is Japan also, I think - so I think it could be
> >> of some use to have reports from those who have had an IGF, or will have
> >> an IGF in the near future, to advise what the major issues arising were etc.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Keith
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Rigf_program mailing list
> >> Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
> >> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Rigf_program mailing list
> Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program
> 
> 
> -- 
>                      >> Izumi Aizu <<
> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,          
> Japan
> www.anr.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rigf_program mailing list
> Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program

________________________________________________________________________
Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC                      <dg at apnic.net>
http://www.apnic.net                                     +61 7 3858 3100

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 1906 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.dotasia.org/pipermail/rigf_secretariat/attachments/20120512/0853cdd2/attachment.bin 
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Rigf_program mailing list
Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program