You are here

2019 IGF - MAG - Virtual Meeting - XIV

The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during an IGF virtual call. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid, but should not be treated as an authoritative record. 

***

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Good afternoon, evening and morning, ladies and gentlemen.  This is MAG official meeting number 14.  A reminder, that this meeting is being recorded.  Captions and a summary report will be out in a couple days after this meeting.  We are using the speaking queue and Luis is going to put the link in the chat right now.  Thank you, Luis.  With that, I'll pass it over to Lynn to start the meeting.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Chengetai, and thank you, everybody, for joining in the midst of a busy holiday period for part of the world, and also for those who are delivering  (distorted audio) something other than work hours.  The first is to approve the agenda which was sent out some time ago and should be, it's in the right corner of the screen for those of you that are participating online.  It's fairly straightforward today.  We are going to focus on hopefully finalizing a discussion on the thematic introductory and closing sessions, and then some of the more usual updates.
If there are individuals who would like ...
  (distorted audio) 
Questions or comments or requests for any of the main sessions, we will certainly allow time for that, in the agenda.  Again we just felt that we had two fairly thorough reviews here over the last couple of calls, and the work seems to be progressing well.  We would just leave it up to any individuals who might want to come in on that, and why don't we try and do that right after item 3, after the updates and thematic introductory session to make sure we are leaving ample time for them.  With that, are there any comments or questions on the agenda or any requests for AOB?
>> Lynn, this is Benny to say I'm on the call but on the phone.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, you signaled that earlier, that is great.  Doing a slow count to 6 to see if there are any other requests for the floor or comments on the agenda.  Not seeing any then, we will, agenda approved and move to the first sort of business, which is introduction and welcome.  I've done most of that already.  I think what we want to do is to make everybody aware that we had posted the consultation for the HLPDC, in fact, it is possible to comment on the full report, that capability is there.  But in discussions with the Host Country and DESA, we thought it was most, and also the Secretary General's office, most appropriate that we actually focus on a recommendation 5, which is digital cooperation and then of course specifically any comments on the IGF cross model but the full report is there for consultation.
We hope everybody does take some time and review and comment.  We also posted some specific questions for each session to try and advance the discussions.  It's everybody's hope that at the IGF in Berlin we are able to make some fairly substantive comments, I guess is the, not trying to presuppose any outcome, but that we have actually had a good solid discussion across the IGF community, and are prepared to engage, particularly with the Secretary General's office on any sort of substantive improvements or any other comments from the session.
I would also like to encourage everybody to do everything they can to reach out to those individuals that aren't historically or particularly involved in Internet Governance or the IGF, that is one of the, I think, key areas of emphasis, key concerns that have come out of the process.  Of course as we look forward to the rest of the world being connected, we want to make sure that these Internet Governance activities engage them and have their voices in, and it's most appropriate that the voices be in as we are actually debating improvements to this model.
So if people could do everything they can to stretch their outreach, and look for comments, whether that's consolidated comments from even online sessions or some physical sessions, that would be really helpful.
Let me just stop there.  We will get a update from the Secretariat but first I would ask Chengetai to make any additional comments he would like to, or the Host Country as well, on the call, with respect to the consultation.  Chengetai?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you, Lynn.  I think you said it all.  It's up there.  Please encourage anybody and everybody to read it, comment, and I think it is very important, because this is one of the chances that we do have to make positive changes to the IGF model.  So please do comment.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Chengetai.  I'm looking at the list of participants and I don't think I see anybody, unless it's joining by phone, anyone from the Host Country, from the German Government.  Is that true?  I'll just give a moment to see if there is anybody on the line that wants to come in.  (pause).
It doesn't look like it, from the numbers that are there, the phone numbers that are there.  Okay.  Well, let's move forward with the agenda.  We would move to item 3 which is update from the Secretariat.  Chengetai, you have the floor.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you, Lynn.  Quickly, Lynn has already spoken about the consultation.  Today as well, actually tomorrow is the last day that MAG members can apply for travel support, so if you haven't yet, please do send an E mail, so that we can put you in the list, and also this year we are traveling a lot of other people so it's very important to do it by tomorrow.  We will not be able to add you on later on.
The schedule, we have I think version E out, and we are going to publish, hopefully, the final schedule by the end of this week or early next week.  We are waiting for people to respond back to us.  We are going through, it is really quite complicated since we have to contact people as well, but hopefully we will publish the version later on and of course there is going to be a couple changes later on, but I think the next version we publish is going to be more or less the stable one.
One thing I would like to mention is that most of you know, Eleonora is taking study leave for this year end next year, so she is not with the Secretariat at the moment.  So if you have any questions for her, please either send them to myself, Anja or the generic IGF mailbox.  We will be getting somebody in temporarily to do some of her duties, and we are redistributing those duties.  So don't be surprised if we don't get any response from Eleanora from now on.  But she will be back in a year or so.
Also, we did have the lac IGF which was last week and I don't know if there is anybody that's on the call that was there, Miguel?
>> Yes, I am here.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Do you want to say a few words on that?
>> Sure, no problem.  Hello, good afternoon, everybody.
  (muffled audio) 
Last week, very good basic discussions, I am a member of the [inaudible] committee ... I don't want to say [inaudible] we had a large number of online, and on site participants.  We overcome the threshold of 50 percent, I think it was 52 percent of panelists, there was a very good [inaudible] we had a very good number, a good diverse number of issues that were talked about.  We had a keynote speaker, on the Secretariat processes.  Another thing that I would like to share with you is that, the [inaudible] report was widely distributed to the communities.  I have been receiving questions on the matter, helping people to answer.  I expect the number of outputs and comments from the region.  That will be all from me at this moment.  Thank you.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you, Miguel.  I think that is all for me but let me give a chance for either Luis or Anja to say something, if I've missed something else.  Luis, Anja?
>> Nothing, Chengetai.
>> LUIS BOBO: Nothing here, thank you.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you.  Back to you, Lynn.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Chengetai, Miguel and lot of appreciation to Eleanora of course for all her efforts over the many years.  I know it will be difficult to replace her.  And also very much appreciate all the extra effort that Chengetai and Luis and Anja and any of the interns are putting in as well, this is a particularly busy time of year and I know they have all been stepping up significantly to help share the workload and I want to send our thanks and real appreciation, if there is anything I or the other MAG members can do in terms of stepping in and helping with some of the work, please, Chengetai, Luis and Anja, don't hesitate to reach out and ask.  This whole community is based on bottom up, and voluntary behaviors by and large.  So I'm sure you would find people that would step up and help for any critical matters, so please.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you, Lynn.
>> Hi, Lynn, this is Susan, can you hear me?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: I can, Susan, yes.
>> I had a quick question about the consultation, and the [inaudible] session.  I can hold for a more appropriate time, sorry.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: No, please go ahead.
>> Thank you.  The consultation was on the IGF consultation was for the entire report, and it's my understanding that [inaudible] session was focused on the IGF class proposed mechanism, is that correct?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: If I understood the question, the consultation, even right now the online consultation is largely focused on section 5 and the IGF plus model, although of course the whole report is open for consultation because there were many parts of the report that are of interest to the broad community.  We haven't determined exactly what the structure of the previously called frontier issues look like.  It does have a different name now focused on digital cooperation.
I would suspect that it would very largely be targeted towards .....
  (no audio) 
  (audio is distorted) 
Consultation, fairly significant point of debate comes up, then I would suspect that that would roll forward to that consultation, to that main session as well.  Did that answer the question?
>> Yes, thank you, I'm sorry, it broke up a little bit for me on my end.  But in terms of developing the format for the session, is there any idea as to when that might take shape, and when we may have a update?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: The   
  (audio is distorted).
End of this month, there is a number of kind of consultations and discussions that are moving forward somewhat slowly, with the vacation period, but we are expected to pick up again at the very end of August, early September.  I would suspect in the first two weeks of September, we should have a better idea.
>> Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: You're welcome.  Ben, you have the floor.
>> Thank you, Lynn.  Yes, it was a question to Chengetai, to the Secretariat.  I wonder when the final version of the schedule will be available, with the main session I'm organizing we are just hanging back until we know for sure the time and date of our session before we send out invitations to speakers.  So I wondered how far away we are from that final schedule.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Ben.  Chengetai?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Hopefully should be out early next week but the main sessions will not move, I don't think.  There are no indication that the main sessions will move.  We are just moving around the other sessions that may clash, maybe there is a Best Practice Forum on IoT or something that we have to move around.  But the main sessions, we don't intend on moving them at the moment.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Chengetai.
>> Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Let me move, we said we were going to offer an opportunity for any of the main session for facilitators to, if you have a request or for the MAG, if you are looking for support, if you have a significant update or questions, this would be a good time to share them.  Let me just wait a moment and see if anybody asks for the floor.  Okay.  Somebody asking for the floor?  (pause) 
Mary?
>> Can you hear me?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Yes.
>> Thank you.  During the (background noise) meeting of our session group 6 (background noise) make a presentation, we are asking whether during the main session, we could have the sort of hub reach out as we did in Mexico, where we could get the (background noise) we don't know whether the search program is being worked on, or if you have such, while making the session interactive with hubs from all over the world.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Mary.  Let me turn to Chengetai.  I know there is lots of activity on setting up the hubs and establishing them.  Do you have any other information for Mary?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, we are setting up the hubs.  Mary, for your session specifically, I would suggest you coordinate closely with Luis.  Luis and the Secretariat is in charge of the remote hubs.  Together with them, I think it will be best, because he is looking at the registration process as well, so you can communicate with the hubs beforehand, and then get timings, set up questions beforehand, so that the people from the hubs can come in and make comments.  So yes, please do communicate with Luis on that.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Chengetai.
>> Thank you very much.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Good.  Hope that helped Mary.  Is there anybody who has a question, request, comment on any of the main sessions?  I'll give that another moment, and if not we will go to agenda item 4.
>> Can you hear me?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Yes.
>> I want to give information on the SDGs main session.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Please do.
>> Thank you.
  (audio is very muffled).
Good afternoon, everybody.  We wanted to ask [inaudible] we want to let everybody know that the proposal is, I sent the proposal ten minutes before the meeting to Secretariat, so they can circulate it to everybody.  That is open to consultation, to improvement, and that the group that is behind the proposal had a meeting on Monday, when we [inaudible] now we have a proposal that can be shown.  The question is that we have a main session on an issue that is of global relevance, to disability [inaudible] interest from high level speakers from all sectors, in this case particularly governments that we need to get more of their ear in order to [inaudible] work of the IGF.  We are thinking on reaching out to the hubs as Mary requested, and the main session wants to have a very deep discussion on how we can achieve SDGs using [inaudible] we thought about how, a representative from [inaudible] in the proposal you will see that we have developed a number of basic questions that will guide the discussions, but giving structure a bit of flexibility in order to make it more dynamic and more [inaudible] I think that would be a short presentation of what we are doing.  Thank you, everybody.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Miguel.  I'll ask if there are any immediate comments or questions, and then reiterate that Miguel said the proposal will be sent out, if it hasn't just been sent out to the MAG for further review.  Just doing a slow count to 6.  Not seeing any further comments to Miguel, nor any further requests for the floor, this is the last call.
>> This is Susan.  I could give an update on the content session if you would like.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Sure because that one was moving about too.  Sure.  Thank you, Susan.
>> Okay, hello again, everybody.  I'm sorry for any background noise here.  We have been moving along on what was previously named the content governance session.  As you will recall, our last virtual meeting we decided to narrow the focus to violent extremist content and policy approaches dealing with this type of content online.  The group is currently in discussion about a revised title.  We are hoping to [inaudible] by the end of this week.  For those of you on the main sessions, please feel free to contribute your thoughts and opinions on the title.  We have also received suggestions for four speakers, four specific names.  We are hoping soon for an update, when able, from some Internet [inaudible] New Zealand Government on our proposed speakers.  If folks would like to propose speakers, that would be great.  We welcome your suggestions.  We are looking in particular right now for Civil Society and technical community.  But we welcome all suggestions.  We are trying to schedule a call for next week to move forward.  But that is our update as of today.  Thank you, and I'm happy to take any questions now or online.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Susan.  Any comments or questions for Susan or that main session working group?  Not seeing any.  I think it was a good review last time as well, just sort of reflection that perhaps we need to revisit the title in light of the reduced focus or increased focus.
Not seeing any other requests for the floor, why don't we move to item 4 which is discussion on the thematic or introductory sessions.  For that, I suspect it's Susan who is going to walk us through the current state of play.  The goal would be to actually get support for moving forward with this as a process from this meeting.  It has been out for comments now for a week and a half, two weeks or so.  Susan, you have the floor.
>> SUSAN:  Thank you, Chair.  So it could just be the time of year, but I got a rather meager response to the proposal for the introductory session.  I like to thank TT who has been unable to join the call and Mary for providing feedback, all of which I think can be accommodated.  If we are sticking with the original near two hour time slot, then we should use the original proposal as the basis for moving forward and developing the session.  Again, I will likely be attending another session at that time.  So I'm not able to be a MAG MC for the digital inclusion session.  But I'm very happy to help run the process and help folks organize the session.
Ben has stepped forward tentatively pending other commitments, to be the MC for the data governance session.  So I'm reaching out to all of the MAG on this call to let me know if you would be interested in being the MC for the digital inclusion or the security and safety session (background noise) again I'm happy to help map out milestones, but we just need some people to raise their hands and volunteer right now.
I can answer specific questions if you like.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Susan.  I note that there is approximately half of the MAG members on this call, and as you said, this is a really heavy holiday period.  Perhaps we can put the request for head moderators or whatever the appropriate title is out to the MAG list, and hopefully close on that in the next week or two.  Just note that again, half the MAG members aren't on the call, and that could make (overlapping speakers) difficult.  One or two questions, I think one thing that would be helpful and I'm not sure if the working group is intending to do this, would be to ensure that there is some level of consistency across the three sessions with respect to any kind of comments they are making with respect to what the MAG is trying to do with this new approach to the program, what we are hoping to get out of it, and probably on the front end, maybe there is some preparatory work that would be helpful, either from the Secretariat or from the working groups themselves, which pulled together the themes and the policy questions under the themes, so that we had some, and we can even post those online ahead of time.
I'm not quite sure if this is work that the working group is intending to take on, or if it's something we should pull into the ad hoc reporting, ad hoc working group on reporting.  Any thoughts?
>> Can you hear me?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Yes.
>> SUSAN:  Thanks.  I think that this could be a task, I understand that Eleonora has left for study leave and she will be dearly missed.  But I think if there is the Secretariat, I see collecting the policy questions as being a rather straightforward task, as they are listed in one of the workshop requirements, so these could all be cultivated for theme.  The Secretariat has already done a great job of coding each of the sessions as it were, whether it's [inaudible] or workshop or session under one of the three themes.  If we are able to organize contact information to those organizers, and send out notice notifying them of the format once we develop it, that could be a way to appeal to those folks.  I think we should also kind of try and tap some people if we can who we think might be willing to help kind of play a leading facilitation role for each of the sub themes.
I'm very happy to map this all out, and in terms of a task, but for the MAG members, for their role we need somebody to volunteer to be the lead moderator as you said or the MC, this would involve speaking and some light organizational work as well.  Then this person would also, this group would help identify MAG members to help in the discussion groups on the sub themes.  I'm sorry, that is a very long winded answer.  But I hope that will be ...
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: That is all useful and comprehensive.  Let me see if there are, anybody is looking for the floor.  Paul's name did appear in the speaking queue for a few seconds, I'm not sure if you were looking for the floor still.
>> Hi, Lynn, yes.  I wanted to make a comment as well.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Go ahead.
>> The participants will only be able to go to one of these, one of the [inaudible] it's quite important that we get common messages across.  Someone might go to the data governance but they go to digital inclusion or safety and security tracks, so we need to ensure there is some consistency and commonality between some of the messages that are put across on the topping and tailing, and from a tailing perspective it would be good to draw some of the findings from the other streams that are cross cutting, etcetera.  We need to find a way to accommodate that somehow, I think.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: I think that is an excellent point, Paul.  I think Susan had a good approach to it, providing we can find the MAG members that will step up and support the activity.  There is certainly some work I or the Secretariat or I with the Secretariat could do with respect to just some of the overall messages with respect to, I know the overall intent of the program, what we are trying to do, what we are trying to do with the new process of introductory sessions and closing sessions, so that is consistent.  I think the earlier we start to pull together the policy questions into the sub themes, again we had done that back in the workshop evaluation session as well.  So hopefully that is not a lot of additional work.
I think that we will start to identify any common areas of interest, and help us understand the spread of the diversity of interest under the three main topics.  If Susan, I'll go to Mary, and then we will come back and see if there are any additional comments, particularly now in the introductory session.  Mary, you have the floor.
>> Thank you very much.  I hope you can hear me.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Very well.
>> I did raise some questions to the group when I was, when Susan sent me an E mail.  First I want to clarify whether this session will be interpreted in six UN languages, since we are inviting mostly the group of south to be there.  There is some of us are not English speakers, and one of those things that I want to clarify whether there is going to be interpreted, one.
Second is, when you do a breakout, how would you interpret to those that will not understand English?  I'm really concerned about having a mono language to do this topping and tailing.  I don't know how all of us will benefit from it, especially those that will not be able to speak English.  That was why I was saying that the time allotted for it looks too long for me, and that the agenda looked too elaborate.  Since we have workshop sessions that are going to take care of so many other things, and we started very well and we did the narratives, and the narratives went to the whole world and again we are coming here to, I don't know, I'm trying to understand the essence of this.  I think that this program is to, the agenda is too large.  I think, and again, if it's not going to be interpreted, it doesn't make any sense for one to be there for one hour, 50 minutes, and do not understand what has been said for the whole period.
So I think we should take all that into consideration.  I don't know whether anybody can help me, so that I can understand how this session will run.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Mary, thank you very much.  I think that is critical points, particularly with interpretation and language, because it does set up so much of the discussion.  I don't know if Susan knows the answer to that, but if not, we can call on Chengetai to ask whether or not the sessions are going to be interpreted, because I think that is a key factor.  Do you know, Susan?
  (traffic noise) 
>> I'll defer to Chengetai as well, I don't think that    while I completely do appreciate if I were there, it would help with French at least but I don't think that there will be interpretation into six languages available because it will be going on at the same time as the digital cooperation panel and that will be the main session and the main sessions are the only sessions that benefit from the interpreters.
So to answer your question, Mary, I'm sorry, but I will ask Chengetai to confirm or add additional comments.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Susan, yes, you are totally correct.  There is no plans at the moment to have the topping and tailing sessions interpreted because that would entail three extra teams of interpreters, and that is not in the budget, unfortunately, that is not in the budget at the moment.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Chengetai.  Mary also had a second point, which was really I think trying to get to the overall scope, I forgot what words you used, Mary, ambitious or comprehensive or something.
>> SUSAN:  I'm happy to give a overview of how the session is envisaged, if that would help.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: I think that would help.  I'd also like to say that, I do share some of Mary's thoughts as well, because we went to a process where we started with three main sessions, main thematic areas because you wanted to build on a story or a process, if you will, and in fact some of the graphics that were put together led by the inclusion group really showed that it is a journey, if you will, if you work with inclusion that there are many sort of steps.
I think it would be helpful if everything we did built the focus in support of that narrative, and that thematic focus sort of didn't feel at the end of the day like we had five or six sub themes under each one of the main sessions and we have 15 mini tracks or something underneath.  I think that would be a little counter.
If you could address that as well, Susan, with respect to your thoughts, that would be helpful.  Thank you.
>> SUSAN:  Sure.  We have already done a lot of this work, I should just start out by saying that as a MAG.  During the second session in Berlin, Mary, I'll refer you to the document, these sub areas have already been identified, and the workshops have already been identified under those.  So it's really a question of the will of those involved to be able to engage on those areas.  The idea would be that we come to each, come together, a MAG member gives a introduction and explains the narrative, and then if we can find a speaker, we are envisioning a kind of Ted talk type person to invite, to then give [inaudible] that would be the second component.  For the breakout groups, those are, those we would see folks just being able to break off into separate groups, and to discuss and raise issues.  It's a really very kind of IGF, I wouldn't like to particularize it too much, but kind of a organic process whereby folks discuss the themes, discuss the workshops that they are going to participate in, and then develop each group would have a Rapporteur or somebody to, after the discussion, to share what the group had discussed in terms of themes that they are going to follow, questions that they would like to ask during the IGF.  And this I think would flow nicely to the concluding session, because folks if they start [inaudible] at the beginning of the week what they are interested in, it helps them as they go along a busy week to focus on these questions, these policy questions in each group.  The overall emphasis of the introductory session is to get people focused, to give them a orientation of what they can expect throughout the week, and to better enable more productive discussions in the concluding session which ultimately I would imagine would help narrow the key messages for each theme.
We do have the time, it could be very long, but for some participants it might not be long enough.  We will have to see.  I'm kind of imploring MAG members to be able to raise their hands and step forward and engage, and this is completely open to anybody who is interested.  For concerns about the introductory session, ask for [inaudible] to change it.  So that's, this is the vision.  It was designed to provide orientation.  I can't speak to the concluding sessions.  I know that [inaudible] is on the call, they can speak to those but this is the general focus.
I'm on hand to help organize and address the work.  I just need some help and need people to step forward.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Susan.  That was very helpful.  Let me see if Mary has any further comments or wants to come back on that.
>> Yeah, thank you, Susan, for that.  Thank you.  You have done a great work.  In my proposal, I understand that this should be a orientation, and for that reason I would think that bullet point 1, 2, 3, the fourth bullet point should go.  The bullet point, I like the idea of a workshop proposal teaching, saying two minutes about what they are going to be doing in the workshop, if we can get some of them workshop organizers.  I agree with that.  But to keep some of us one hour, almost two hours without understanding a single thing that we are saying, will be, it will not be fair.
So what I would think we should look at, if there is any other way we can do it in such a way that having interpretation, that would be good and would remove the session, both the topping and tailing I propose that we remove the break out session.  We do the pitching and we also listen to comments when we are all back to the tailing so we allow people to give us their messages, the messages they brought from the workshops.  That is the way I'm thinking, but I don't know whether, if MAG insists on going ahead with that, I think that for the fact that we are inviting 80 countries that are not English speaking countries to IGF, I think we should give them opportunity also to follow us on what we are doing.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Mary, thank you, and I mean, I think everybody feels for your points, with respect to language.  It doesn't sound like, and I know everything the Germans have put into this event, it doesn't sound like it's going to be possible to get interpretation in for these sessions.
I'll point out that getting interpretation for these sessions, but not having it for the bulk of the rest of the program isn't really fixing the problem in any substantive manner.  So I think we need to assume that the sessions are not going to be interpreted.  If you are coming to the IGF and you are going to participate sort of broadly in the activities, then again, it's kind of sad statement of fact, but you are going to need some level of English, unless you are going to limit your participation to the main sessions which of course are the only sessions that have interpretation at the IGF.
So I don't think that we need to build these introductory sessions around the fact, around a negative fact that there won't be interpretation, if I can say it that way.  I think that the question that is in front of the MAG at the moment is whether or not they support this approach, which would allow, I think, people to get familiar with the topics, to get familiar with the topics at the level of policy questions.  It would also allow them to understand all the other component pieces of work that are taking place across the IGF ecosystem whether that is D.C.s, BPFs, NRI activities that all comes into these sessions as well.  I think there is a awful lot useful that we can do with these sessions, and it almost feels as if it's a blend of some of the previous newcomer sessions that we used to have, but more topic focused, more substance focused, or it's going into more depth at the same time.
I'll stop there and see if Susan, Mary or any other MAG member wants to come back in.  Mary?
>> Yeah, thank you .... thank you, Lynn and Susan.  I'm only say that can we make it lighter and make it like orientation as we used to, so that we will focus on that, instead of getting it heavy to the point of breakout session.  That is what, I understand what you are saying about some level of English, there are some that don't even have English, because we are told that we should look at those that have not been participating and those that are not participating are mostly those that don't have English, I mean don't speak English.
If we are bringing them, except we are going to change like, the person we are recommending from West Africa does not speak English, so those are things    I don't want to be negative over it, but I'm just saying that probably we make it lighter, reduce the, make it just the orientation, so that people get to know what will be happening in each of the tracks, since the narratives are already there and all the things that we have done, and workshops were selected, the workshop will fit into this thematic session.  We have about six main sessions that some of them are also speaking to the sub themes.  That is what I'm saying that probably we will think about, if MAG says fine, they are going on breakout session, I don't have, I will go by MAG, because I think we should have the consensus on it.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Mary.  Those are good comments.  Let me go to Paul Rowney who is in the queue and come back to Susan an see if there are additional comments.  Paul? 
>> Thank you, Lynn, I actually support Mary that this is a bit heavy.  It's the first day, people are arriving (background noise) that aside, my thought is this should probably be limited to an hour, and it should just focus on introducing the theme and what the expectation should be, getting some feedback from the audience.  I do like the idea of allowing the workshop, the different workshops to give a short pitch as well, to try and entice people to come to their specific workshops.  But yeah, try and keep it to an hour, and keep the focus on what it was originally proposed for, to bring an introduction to what that stream is about, and to get people on their journey, and not to prolong it.
I also sympathize with Mary on the language issue, but of course I understand the limitations that we have there, thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Paul.  I myself think it's, in a good way, it's a lot of information we want to cover, have to cover, should cover, I think.  I think that takes time.  If we actually want   
  (phone ringing).
   time for audience participation, audience engagement, or participants to engage, sorry, I was distracted for a moment, if we want the participants to engage fully as well, that requires time and honestly, we seem to, that is the time we always all too frequently seem too short in these sessions.
Let me see if there is anything Chengetai wants to add with respect to timing or anything like that, anything that, from your consideration and from seeing these processes for so many years, Chengetai, and then go to Susan or to any other MAG members that are interested in the floor.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you, Lynn.  As far as interpretation is concerned, there is nothing we can do about that.  Let's focus on what we can change.  As far as the timing goes, amount of time, it is speaking to various audiences, so I understand what Mary is saying, and also what Paul is saying as well.  But people can get different things or more things or less things from a session.  (background noise) I don't want to use this word but I couldn't think of a better word, for those people who are new to, very new to it, can get up to their capacity, the newness, most people who have got medium understanding, they can get more.  So I don't think we should actually restrict it to make it just that basic level.  But then of course, I mean it's up to the MAG to give the consensus.
So I personally don't think it's a bad idea to have such a detailed thing, and people can all get what they can get out of it, and it will be different for different people.  Thank you, Lynn.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Chengetai.  Susan, do you want to come in and are there any other MAG members looking for the floor?
>> I'm happy to come in.  We work on the basis of more support for a shorter session, we want to eliminate 50 minutes from the session, then we can.  I mean, a alternative is to keep it open, so if the session feels as if it can wrap up early, can certainly do that.  (background noise).
But I think in terms of, there will be nothing else going on, except for the high level panels.  So we really can't fully determine what our possibilities are, I guess.  We just have to make a guesstimate.  The guesstimate I think will depend on whether or not we can recruit workshop session organizers, Open Forum session organizers, and [inaudible] session organizers to come in and to kind of take ownership of being able to explain what they plan for the week.  I'm not hard and fast on the breakout sessions (background noise) I do think it's a good way for people to make new contacts, for people to exchange with folks that they probably wouldn't otherwise have had a chance to in kind of a informal (background noise) that could be very useful.  One of the IGF purposes is to build connections and exchange information and best practices.  (background noise) I stand by, stand up ready to assist, we need in terms of organization, I might actually, if people don't step forward, I may come asking help.  So just know that I'm here to go with what the group determines is best.  And happy to help in any way, thanks.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Susan.  Nobody else has requested the floor.  I wonder if there is a compromise position, where we leave the time on the agenda, we could put a note that says an hour and 50 minutes, hour and a half or whatever is allotted for this session.  But, I don't know, we could find a way to word it I'm sure, which is, you know, but the session will take the time it needs or something like that.  There is a piece of me that feels like an hour is fairly tight.  I mean it is first thing in the morning, probably not going to start exactly on time.  And by the time you get in, we are explaining the narrative, and we explain what we are doing with the overall processes, the theme and we pull out the various pieces of work across the IGF ecosystem, that have to address this, and I do think getting a speaker or somebody who can tell a story or something about why this topic matters, and make it really real, is a really important part of it as well.
By the time you add all that in, it's pretty much been a one way talking shop, we haven't given any time for any of the participants to actually engage to comment, to suggest, or refine the focus to anything.
I would hate for us to have the time, push the time back, start late, and run out of time just as the conversation is getting started.  So I'm wondering if there is a compromise which says that we leave the time as is, put a note which says that the session will take whatever time is required, a maximum of an hour and 50 minutes or something is allotted, something like that.
Then I think we do need maybe a little more discussion on whether or not these are real parallel breakout groups or whether or not it's kind of, I think there are only five or six sub themes under each one of the main tracks, whether or not we do those serially with everybody who is there, and if we are doing them serially with everybody who is there, then I think the expanded time is probably necessary.  But let me see if there are any quick comments or reactions to that from anyone, MAG members, Susan, Mary, Paul.  (background noise) someone looking for the floor?
>> (overlapping speakers).
>> Deniz?  Were you looking for the floor?
  (voices in the background).
Luis, could you close Deniz's line?  Thank you.
>> At the expense of taking the floor too often, happy to see that I hope that folks will come in and share their thoughts, I think that's a good way forward.  So I appreciate your proposal, and I think again that is a good way forward.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Jennifer put a good comment in the chat.  I know you and one or two others are on the phone so can't see that but she supports the idea of break down sessions to participants in a smaller discussion group as newcomers are more comfortable to ask questions in a smaller more informal setting.  She says perhaps not as long, but completely removing the time frame might be a shame as well.  Raquel is supporting the fact that it's important not to completely limit the time just now, and that we should do what we can to allow more interaction, as possible.  She said is there something we can do, translating ourselves if we were to move into breakout groups or make different language breakouts.  I think those are all possibilities.
Paul has asked (overlapping speakers).
>> So sorry.
>> Susan, I want to make a suggestion to close this, maybe we need to take this off line, maybe Susan can set up a working group meeting that we can all jump onto, those that are interested.  And just a little bit more, so we have a final that we are all in agreement with.
>> Paul, I'm happy to do that.  May I just ask a few kind of practical questions.  If it is possible, it will be useful to understand what MAG members' availability will be that day.  I don't know if the Secretariat could ask MAG members if they will be able to attend a introductory session and if so, which one.  That way we can count on folks being there.  I want to say up front that I think that this will require from the Secretariat, Chengetai, I think it's a big part of the success of the session on the day will be able to [inaudible] the attendees know about it, so send E mail and we can work on this in the working group, if we want to form a working group that is great, to send a E mail to ask or invite workshop organizers from each of the three themes to notify them about the session, so they could continue to plan for it.  I wanted to ask those two technical points, and happy to set up a discussion off line [inaudible]
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Susan.  Paul, I don't know if you have any quick comments.  I think Susan, if you set up an ad hoc working group to move this forward and ask for volunteers, an I certainly hope those people that have expressed some preferences here join the working group as well, so we can work to close this.  Chengetai is saying he would set up a doodle poll for an ad hoc group call on this.  I think that would be good.  Any further comments to Susan's questions?  Last few questions at the end here, take to the working group.
>> Hello, this is Mary.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Hi, Mary.
>> Yes, the interesting comments on chat, on the chat, like probably the breakout will be breakouts in languages so that people can speak to themselves in languages, in their languages, that is a great, very great idea, and a great option.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: That is a important point, certainly in keeping with the community determining what sort of processes and tools are most useful for them.  It always depends very much on who is actually participating, and Jennifer made the point earlier, of course, that if we are to do breakout groups in that sense, we need to think about what that means for any of the online participation.  I think all these questions can go forward to this ad hoc working group.  Any final comments, Susan or Paul, Mary, any of the other MAG members?
>> No.
>> No, none, thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Susan, thank you, you and the group of people who began moving this forward at the Berlin meeting as well really appreciate your staying with it and moving it forward.  I don't see tama on the call, I don't see Maria, either, with respect to the concluding session.  I'm wondering if we should just have the ad hoc working group actually address the concluding sessions as well.  I do think there is kind of a natural follow on and certainly a tie between the two.  So that might be the best way to make substantive progress on that as well.  Are there any objections to moving the discussion on the concluding sessions to that ad hoc working group?  Not seeing any or hearing any.  That group did good work in terms of laying out the recommendations based on our discussions at the Berlin meeting.  So I think we can move that forward.
As we said on our last call, the last part of that report talks about consistent reporting.  We are going to move this forward to the ad hoc working group on reporting, which will be kicking off in two weeks or early September, sometime right in there.  I need to send a doodle poll out.  Again we are waiting until after the heavy period on all the main session reporting, and after meetings in New York which in fact took place three or four weeks ago.  So just waiting for the areas to close and we will pick that up.
I think that is pretty close as well in terms of past practices, and we have a awful lot of documentation to work from.  It is simply making sure that aligns well with these other processes, and that we are working to move our reporting processes forward as consistently as possible.  I don't see any objection.
Thank you, Chengetai, for offering to set up the doodle poll to progress this work in this ad hoc working group.  Item 5 is updates from the working groups.  Is there anybody who wants to jump in and go first?  While you are rushing to put your names in the speaking queue I can give a update on the working group on fund raising.  That has been on sort of a hold or certainly a slow roll.  We had several discussions with German hosts about what we might do to advance a concrete fund raising effort, given the number of high level participants we are expecting, need to pick that up again here again after the holiday period.  I think we can also reinvigorate the fund raising group itself and we have a lot of materials from the efforts of the working group to date.
I think we can just identify probably ten to 15 top candidates for potential donations and assign some people to work those so we have that going in parallel.
I will take responsibility for kickstarting that and moving that forward in the next few weeks as well.  We will also, there is a open discussion with the German Government and the Host Country with respect to what we might do in terms of taking advantage of the various high level participants that are going to be there.
Let me see if there are any comments or questions from any MAG members or any of the working group members.  It's not been a particularly active working group this year to date.  Is there anybody who wants to give a report on any of the other working groups?
>> Hello.
  (microphone feedback).
>> Sorry, I'm echoing.  I have two computers on.  I have a echo.  Hoping you can still hear me.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Not too bad.
  (microphone feedback).
>> Outreach and improvements because I don't think on the call, we sent a E mail to the Secretariat to intervene, because we are waiting information from him, we are still working on what we are, August is the deadline for reporting to the Secretariat but we are waiting for the Secretariat to get back to us from the last E mail that we sent.  That is about it, on engagement.
  (microphone feedback).
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you.  Were you going to give a update on improvements, did you say at the beginning?
>> Yeah.  I wish I could get rid of this echo.  We are trying to move forward.  We have done a chart, and asked volunteers [inaudible] aspect of the chart they will work on, so far we have volunteers and they are trying to move forward.  The next few days we will try to hold a meeting and try to move forward so that we can get some serious work done.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, June.  Let me see if there are any comments or questions from MAG members on either of those two working groups.  Not seeing any.
>> Sorry, Lynn, this is [inaudible] unmute myself.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Hi, Ben, you have the floor.
>> On the finance could we have also this [inaudible] it would be helpful if we can get them at the IGF when we are there.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: That is a good point.  One or two small edits I wanted to make on it as well.  We obviously need, I don't remember if it had the date or not but yes, we can certainly update the graphics, and I'm sure we can find some resources to get them printed.
>> We could also include couple of sentences about the German, the condition they made for people to go to the IGF, so they can get ideas for money would be useful.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Right, I think it's important.  Any comments on those three working groups from MAG members?  Slow count to 6.  There was a fourth working group which is on the workshop prep and eval, which has been very active and of course were very active during the earlier stages of the workshop process.  I know there have been one or two meetings as well as they consider whether or not we should do a survey or something like that to follow up and understand desires on improving the process, that sort of thing.  But we will get a further update, Jutta is leading that and she is on holiday at the moment.  We can get a update on that, going forward.
If there aren't any other comments    maybe there is one other comment.  Last year we had a, last few years we had a working group on multi year strategic work program.  This year the decision was taken not to reCharter that as a working group.  In fact there was no request to reCharter as a working group given some of the improvements that are being made in the whole workshop process here.  But also, I think on the basis of some fairly kind of embedded differences of opinion on what was appropriate going forward.  Some of that I think may roll into some of the HLPDC consultation report.  I think we can take a look at the process that we are all following this year, and kind of look back towards some of the recommendations that came out of the working group last year, and see if there are any new learnings or anything else we would like to underline or leave with the next MAG.  But I think that would be more of a evaluation, reporting effort, not a formal working group effort.  But again, the notion was more to get a multi year work program in front of the community, so that we had more notice and more time to develop workshop sessions to pull in different partners, to look at different cooperation initiatives, to potentially attract new donors and that sort of thing.  We have taken some steps towards that in the process to date.
And I think we will take a significant step at the back end of this year's process when we actually start to identify, based on the discussions and the policy questions that were debated at this IGF, what are the areas of focus going forward.  I think some parts of that initial Charter are being met are evolving process here, others I think were more kind of fundamental differences in terms of what was appropriate, and I think we can possibly evaluate that again in the context of this whole HLPDC report, see where we are at the end of that outcome.  But I didn't want to just leave that subject there even though it's not a formal working group.
Let me see if there are any comments or questions, or some of the members on the call here were very active members of the working group in the past years.  Let me see if they want to add anything or comment.  All right.  Again doing the slow count to 6.  Not seeing any requests for the floor or hearing any.
Let's move to the last item on the agenda, ahead of AOB and it's updates from best practice forums and Dynamic Coalitions.  If Anja wants to give an update on the NRIs, this is the time to do that.  Is there anybody who wants to comment on the activities of the best practice forums?  I know there has been a lot of good activities in quite a number of them.
I can also appreciate that we may not have the leaders on the call, in the holiday period.
>> Hi, Lynn, it's Ben Wallis.  I can update on the DBF and Cybersecurity.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Great, thank you.
>> We have published a call for contributions.  I think that was put out a couple of weeks ago at the end of July.  And I think Anja will be putting out a separate call for contribution from NRIs today or tomorrow, or maybe she has done, I'm not sure I'm on the NRI list.  But that is coming as well.  We were doing slightly different calls for contributions to the NRIs.
We have been, so the main objective of this year's BPF on Cybersecurity is to look at international agreements and initiatives on Cybersecurity, and understand how they are being taken forward, what kind of best practices there could be to fulfill any commitments made, what kind of accountability there is for commitments when they are made.
It's a general call for contributions, but we are also trying to reach out to those organizations that have been responsible for these agreements or have signed up to them.  We are, we have invited written contributions, until the 6th of September.  Then obviously we will be going through the process of drafting a final report ahead of the IGF meeting.  I think we will have a draft report of this year's BPF work published by the middle of October, so that people can digest it before we get to Berlin, and then take any final comments before it's finalized.  I'll leave it there.
Yeah, a E mail was sent to the MAG on 31st of July if people want to find the call for contributions, and they can go look for the BPFs on the IGF Web site as well.  Thanks.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Ben.  Let me put the link to the call for contributions in the background doc in the chat room there.  Any comments or questions from the MAG for the BPF on Cybersecurity?
Not seeing any, I'm excited to see what comes out of that session.  We have been doing BPFs, in fact all of these sessions now for multiple years, and they are all advancing really nicely.  Thank you, Ben.
Anybody from either local content, gender or the AI, big data BPF?
>> Lynn, I can give a update on IoT big data and AI.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Excellent.  Thank you.
>> First of all she sends her apologies, she sent a E mail to the list saying she is on holiday, she would try but apparently she is not in a area where she has wi fi in her evening.  So I contacted her earlier today to discuss this update.  I'm happy to give it.  The BPF has had a series of conference calls and virtual meetings before the July and August summer break in a lot of areas.
Those calls were enough to, for the BPF to identify three main clusters of policy challenges to focus on.  One is related with trust in IT big data, AI and their applications.  A second cluster is focused on the use and uptake of the new technologies.  A third one, we try to combine all the data related challenges, going from the quality of data, over privacy, to management of data.
That is the first block, really short, trying to come up with a few simple lines, what are the main challenges.  The second part of the work will start which is looking for best practices for each of those challenges, groups looking for best practices.  We will resume very soon, I think the end of August or beginning of September with additional conference calls to look into and discuss best practices.
But in the meantime, the BPF also sent out a survey to collect additional input.  The survey is relatively broad and it is intended for people working in the sector of AI and working with these technologies, developing and implementing them.  But as well, for people that can be considered users of the technology so the questions are formulated in best way that they can be addressed to both.  We will put the link to the Web site, to the Web Page where you can find all the information in the chat in a minute.
I think it's important that we would like to ask to help with the survey.  In the meantime over the summer we had calls and exchanged E mails with organizations just like UNESCO and ITU, to try and identify people that focus and work on these topics and try to get them involved also in the further work of the BPF.
I think that's the main, I'd be happy to answer any questions, but I think the most important is we did in groundwork before.  Now we are looking for best practices, and we have also just like the Cybersecurity BPF, we also have a survey out which we would like to ask for your help to promote it and send it around.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Wim, that was very helpful.  Thank you for the work you are doing here, especially like the effort to reach out and look for cooperation from other parties or entities.  That is always a key kind of success factor, and also one of the things we have been trying to do for some time now.  So thank you.  Any comments or questions for the working group, artificial intelligence, Internet of Things and big data?  A good point in the chat room, saying that the BPFs need to be shared broadly, so that the community can actually participate.  He's said that he is not seeing a significant amount of engagement, may need to rethink how we actually try to do that.  I think that's a good comment.  Maybe something which Ahmadu, you can put to the MAG list and see if we can get a discussion started on that.
Not seeing any other comments or requests for that particular BPF.  Is there anyone on the call who can give a update on the gender and access BPF or the local content?
>> Hi, Lynn, it's Raquel.  I can go ahead with the BPF gender if that is okay.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Excellent, thank you.
>> I'm sorry, I'm trying to move between the connection here, I couldn't find the button for the speaking queue.  But for the BPF gender, actually my colleagues are leading the way with the support now of [inaudible] there was a call that started having more case studies, so the presentation from the last call was around ITU the program, the initiative and also with the Centre for Internet and Society in India.  Next this Monday is going to be presented the research ICT in Africa, and also (indecipherable) they are going to present their work, and their case studies focusing on gender access in digital economy, the development of skills and initiatives.
There was a call open to get inputs, and we didn't receive as much so far, about ten, 11.  Some of them are also out of scope, so we may need some efforts to work on that, and one of the discussions with the group is if we extend the deadline a little bit.  For the MAG members, one of the asks is, if you can distribute and if you have any of the initiatives that we should be highlighting to this BPF, let us know.  The calls have been more attended, about 20, 25 participants.  So that's a good indicator in terms of the community participation.
And more than that, I'm sorry if I don't have all the details, I'm going to share the links later on, but I'm sure Chenai has already shared in the MAG list.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Raquel.  That was a very good update.  Thank you.  I've seen the request for input on the survey.  I hope MAG members are pushing that out to the networks, just as you are for the other calls on the other BPFs as well.  Any comments or questions for Raquel?BPF on gender and access?
All right.  Not seeing any, is there a MAG member who can give us or someone who can give us a update on the BPF on local content?  If not, we will ask for an update to be sent to the MAG list.  I don't see anybody there who can speak to it.  We will ask for an update to be sent to the MAG list then for the BPF on local content.
Anja, is there anything you want to    I know you gave quite a thorough update on the NRIs the last couple of calls, but is there anything you want to add just now?
>> ANJA GENGO: Hi, Lynn, thank you, nothing major.  Just we are focusing on gathering the case study inputs from the NRIs for the main session and also for the collaborative sessions, the deadline is first of September.  After that, the Secretariat will work on consolidation of inputs and producing concise input publications that will serve as an information for what we can expect from the session.
In the week of September 2 to 6 we will have a dedicated call to all these inputs and hopefully finalize the session proposal that is pending, I believe just confirmation this week and set up the time line for developing these publications that I mentioned.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Anja.  Any questions or comments from MAG members for Anja?
Not seeing any, we will move forward.  I don't know if there is anybody who is able to give an update on Dynamic Coalitions.  I saw some E mail exchanges earlier.  I think everybody is on holiday.  But let me see if there is somebody who is able to give an update.
>> Lynn, can you hear me?
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Yes.
>> Hi.  This is Susan again.  The Dynamic Coalition on DMS issues is starting up its session on universal acceptance readiness, for folks who are not familiar with the issue, it is key to digital inclusion, digital inclusion theme, universal acceptance is that all Internet, all software systems can recognize, process, store and be generally compatible with any scripts so we are moving along with our session, we will have broad representation from different parts of the world which is excellent news.  If folks are interested in readiness or have any questions about the sessions, please feel free to contact me, and we have got some great discussion going on, on our listserv, about the connection between universal acceptance and SDGs.  Please don't hesitate to reach out.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Thank you, Susan, that was a new Dynamic Coalition last year, and it's another important area, all the others are as well but we are glad to see that is moving forward apace.
I don't see any comments or questions.  I think I have one kind of general reflection.  I know that the NRIs and D.C.s are all working really hard within their own set of activities.  But also, trying to participate deeply and broadly in all the work of the IGF, so I want to encourage all the MAG members, as you go through all of your various activities, whether it's a main session planning or you are thinking about concluding or introductory, that we make sure that we are actually thinking about all those other component pieces, and what we can do to actually ensure that their voices, their input, their engagement is actually embedded in all the work we do.
I think that outreach needs to go very much in both directions, and we encourage everybody to continue to think about what we can do to further the collaboration across all the component pieces.
In the same vein, I would actually encourage all the intersessional activities as we think about this HLPDC report consultation on digital cooperation and on the IGF plus model, to have discussions within your activities, your groupings, whether it's regional or youth or Dynamic Coalition, and think about what you need to actually make your activities more successful, more substantive, to accomplish what you all are trying to do.
All those inputs are extremely valid and they can go in at an individual level, they can go in obviously at an entity or organizational level.  They can go in at any kind of level in between there as well.  I do hope, we are all thinking about what we can do to actually strengthen digital cooperation, what we can do to strengthen the IGF model, and if we are doing that from our own set of activities, I think that is the best way to build the most robust Internet Governance systems set of processes here that we can, so encourage everybody to continue engaging deeply in all the preparations for IGF in Berlin, but also to participate in the consultation and get your comments and thoughts in there as well.
Final word, I'll turn to the Secretariat to see if there is anything else we should be capturing or as there were no requests for AOB, Chengetai, is there anything you would like to comment on?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: No, nothing comes to mind at the moment.  Just the next meeting, it's supposed to be scheduled on the 28th.  But I would like to move it to the 4th of September, if that is okay with everybody, if there is no objections.
>> I second, this is Benny.
>> Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Any other comments or reactions from MAG members?  Everybody is saying no objection, or agree, and that is probably a more reasonable pacing at this point anyway, particularly taking it out of the last week of August before a lot of, and then into September, so why don't we do that then.  And just get a note out to everyone, Chengetai, as I'm sure you would.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Sure, will do.  Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Okay, thank you.  Thank you to everybody for participating, again, I know a number of you are     participating outside of normal quote work hours, and I also believe quite a number of you are participating, a number of us are participating from the middle of our vacations as well.  So thank everybody for making the effort.  And we will talk to you in a few weeks time.  Have a good morning, afternoon, evening.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Lynn.
>> Thank you, everyone.
>> Thank you.
>> LYNN SAINT-AMOUR: Bye bye.

Контактная информация

United Nations
Secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)

Villa Le Bocage
Palais des Nations,
CH-1211 Geneva 10
Switzerland

igf [at] un [dot] org
+41 (0) 229 173 678