[seedig] Role of former SEEDIG Hosts?

Sorina Teleanu sorinat at diplomacy.edu
Tue Oct 24 20:53:54 CEST 2017


Dear all,

First, I would like to thank Anja for raising this issue, and to Michael
and Dusan for providing their input. I am adding below my own thoughts, not
on behalf of the executive committee, but as an executive committee member.

1. If I understand Anja’s suggestion correctly, the idea is to create
observers seats on the executive committee for hosts of SEEDIG annual
meetings. In my understanding, if we talk about hosts, this would mean
organisations, not individuals. And it would be the decision of host
organisations to take up the seats or not, and to appoint whomever they
want for these seats. (Of course it would be ideal for those appointees to
be persons who had helped with the SEEDIG meeting, but that might not
always be the case). If I am not wrong, this is also how it works with the
IGF MAG, and former IGF host countries. Anja, please correct me if this is
not the case.

2. If my understanding is correct, then I would, personally, be in favour
of adding such observer seats on the election committee.

*Why?* It is true that SEEDIG meetings are different, but there are also
things that can be learned from one cycle to another. And it does not have
to be only about logistics in the strict sense of the term, but also other
issues related to the organisation of the meeting (one example being
communication and outreach, where the host plays an important role). As
someone who has been around for all previous three meetings, I believe that
having the former hosts around, to lend their advice and support, would be
a positive thing. And it is not only about the former hosts up to now, but
something for the future also.
Moreover, since we are talking about organisations, having their
institutional support on a long term basis should be a positive thing as
well. One simple example would be having AEK (the 2017 host) on board for
the future, and helping with outreach to other regulatory authorities
within the region. Same for RNIDS (2016 host), helping with outreach to
ccTLD registries. (Yes, they could do this even if not offered a formal
observer seat, but why not recognise their contributions through such
roles?)

*How?* Observer roles are not envisioned in the current Terms of reference
for the executive committee. But the ToR should be easy to amend, if the
community decides that this is something to be tried. Building on the
discussion so far, I see few things that could be detailed in the ToR for
these roles:
a. The seats would be open for former and current SEEDIG host organisations.
b. It would be up to the host organisations to decide if they want to take
up these seats, and who to appoint.
c. Observers would be entitled to participate in the work of the executive
committee (as it is the case with IGF host countries on the MAG),
specifically on issues related to the planning of the annual meeting (i.e.
not only logistics). However, a clear difference would be made between
executive committee members and observers: the roles and responsibilities
of the executive committee would not apply to observers, and they would not
be able to take part in decision making processes.

If we are concerned that this might not work as planned, we could consider
starting with a pilot. This would mean having these seats added on an
interim basis, for one or two years, and revisiting them after, based on
actual experience.

These are my thoughts at the moment. It would be great to hear from
previous hosts (and also from the upcoming host), and from other community
members as well.

Best regards,

Sorina

On 24 October 2017 at 11:48, Dusan Stojicevic <dusan at dukes.in.rs> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
>
>
> Nice idea, but…
>
> I want to clarify this with some exact facts.
>
> 1.       Annual meetings of SEEDIG was held in Sofia, Belgrade and Ohrid.
> By being a member of exe com at those points, I can say that you are
> talking about three people here - Iliya, me and Sasho, respectively. Anyone
> else would be just a representative of the hosting country, which is not
> idea, I presume?
>
> 2.       The role of advisory committee or the role of observer is
> unclear in SEEDIG process so far. This needs to be specified, but I always
> think of that role as Statler and Waldorf, two grandpa’s from Muppet Show,
> sitting on the balcony seats… (for young members of the list -
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statler_and_Waldorf)
>
> 3.       All three of us, we all have good idea about logistics, but each
> meeting was different than other because of differences in SEEDIG agenda.
> We can help in logistics, but don’t know is that important, regarding the
> fact that every next meeting will be different in the future.
>
> 4.       Iliya and me, we already resigned in exe com, by our decisions
> to not involve more in SEEDIG. Sasho is currently in exe com. If you want
> to build something like this, before losing time in brainstorming – it’s
> not that you have 20 people to ask – it’s just three - you can ask us about
> participating in such committee. Somehow, I doubt that I would like the
> role of Statle or Waldorf J
>
>
>
> My two cents,
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dusan
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* seedig [mailto:seedig-bounces at lists.rnids.rs] *On Behalf Of *Michael
> J. Oghia via seedig
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 24, 2017 10:27 AM
> *To:* Anja Gengo <anja.gengo at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* SEEDIG list <seedig at rnids.rs>
> *Subject:* Re: [seedig] Role of former SEEDIG Hosts?
>
>
>
> Hi Anja,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the additional context. And to clarify: I used advisor as a
> synonym for observer, so absolutely. Since our community is also rather
> small, those individuals would likely already be involved in some capacity
> regardless.
>
>
>
> So, I still support it -- thanks for the good suggestion!
>
>
> Best,
>
> -M
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Anja Gengo <anja.gengo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Mihajlo, All,
>
>
>
> Thanks a lot for a prompt response, and very important points.
>
>
>
> While leaving it to the SEEDIG respective community to further brainstorm
> on this, I will just say that the experience of some of the NRIs and the
> IGF is to give to the Hosts the role of observers. It could be also to
> think about the role of advisors, as you said, with keeping a clear
> distinction between the role of the members of the EC and the Hosts
> representatives.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Anja
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 24 October 2017 at 10:18, Michael J. Oghia <mike.oghia at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Anja, all:
>
>
>
> I like this idea, especially since it could help incentivize more people /
> organizations / countries to get involved and help them stay involved over
> time. It would also give additional support to the EC. I'd like to hear
> what others think as well. I'm only concerned that since the SEEDIG region
> is relatively small, so eventually someone from each country could be
> involved, which could create a lot of unwanted bureaucracy and politics, or
> otherwise hinder the process.
>
>
>
> Perhaps if such individuals were solely in an advisory position but the EC
> keeps all decision-making abilities, it would best protect the smooth
> operation of the SEEDIG process.
>
>
> Best,
>
> -Mihajlo
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:06 AM, Anja Gengo via seedig <
> seedig at lists.rnids.rs> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
>
> Given the excellent progress on developing the ToR for the Executive
> Committee, I wanted to briefly ask if the SEEDIG respective community
> should think about giving a possibility for the former Hosts of the SEEDIG
> annual meetings, to continue having a say in the future SEEDIG processes.
>
>
>
> I know some of the NRIs colleagues have this practice, as well as the IGF,
> where the seat on the multistakeholder core organizing teams is given to
> the Host Countries.
> It could be seen as a way of showing respect toward those that were the
> direct drivers of the process implementation with making possible for the
> annual meeting to be hosted for the SEEDIG community.
>
> And of course, every next Host could most certainly benefit from the
> experience the former Hosts have. This option would be alternative,
> depending on the Hosts final decision.
>
>
>
> Just an idea, for the SEEDIG respective community to think of.
>
> Thank you, and good luck with the election process!
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Anja
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=link>
> <#m_-3445589005093853702_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>



-- 

*______________________________*

*Sorina Teleanu*

Digital Policy Senior Researcher | DiploFoundation
Anutruf, Ground Floor | Hriereb Street | Msida, MSD 1675, Malta
www.diplomacy.edu | www.giplatform.org | https://dig.watch

[image: 15years.diplomacy.edu] <http://15years.diplomacy.edu/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.rnids.rs/pipermail/seedig/attachments/20171024/02f1b548/attachment.htm>


More information about the seedig mailing list