You are here

DC Coordination Meeting XV

October 16, 2020, 13:00-14:00 UTC

******

This text, document, or file is based on live transcription. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART), captioning, and/or live transcription are provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. This text, document, or file is not to be distributed or used in any way that may violate copyright law.

******

>> JUTTA CROLL: Hi, Marianne, good to see you good.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Hello. Good to see you, indeed. Yes. I would encourage people to turn on their cameras as in these COVID-19 times, we don't really have much opportunity to see each other, so at least if we can see each other online, it's sort of a friendly gesture, but it's not mandatory and I do understand also that some people have bandwidth problems with the camera, but it's -- it adds a personal touch in these difficult times.

>> MARIANNE: I want to see you too. If I go off and on camera, it's because I have to jump to another meeting.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: I totally understand. It's not mandatory and it's just aspirational and a suggestion.

>> MARIANNE: It's okay. Markus, we have the same philosophy. Understood. Just so you know why I go off from time to time, I have to check something on the screen elsewhere.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: No problem.

>> Hey, Alivier.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Hello. Hello. Everyone. It's top of the hour but let's wait one or two minutes.

>> I'll be back in a minute.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: We're still waiting for people to join, but as we are waiting, before going into the substance, maybe I can hand over to Sam. She, as you know, has taken over the task of supporting the dynamic coalitions, and she has spotted quite a few, I won't say problems, but challenges that don't make her job easy. One of them, actually, is to identify who you all are when doing the summary record of the meeting, so it would be helpful if you actually can put behind your name, just change your Zoom login and say which Dynamic Coalition you're affiliated to.

But for those that don't know how to do it, maybe Sam can give a tutorial. (Laughing). Even I managed to do it, so that says something. If you go on the top right, it says there how you can actually change your login details.

But, Sam, over to you.

>> SAMANTHA DICKINSON: Good morning, afternoon, evening, everyone. So if you want to change your name, if you just click on the participant's list and hover over your name, there will be a More with a little arrow and if you click on that it says to rename and it allows you to rename yourself. If you could please do that to have your first name, sir name, bracket, DC name, that would be much appreciated.

I do have a couple of names from last week, so what I normally do is if the name isn't fully there, I do a little Googling, but I didn't have any success with a couple of last week's names, so if I can just ask if anyone knows a Joel Morano, I don't know if I announced that correct, if anyone knows which DC he's affiliated with, that would be fantastic. There was also a Leon last week and that was his full name in the Participant's List, Leon, so I'm not sure where he's from. So if anyone knows either of those people, I would much appreciate it. I'll put their names into the chat just in case that helps. If I can find the chat. (Joao Moreno).

In terms of the rest, we're again today going to have our live transcript fed into the Zoom room so you can find that by clicking on the Closed Caption link. I think it should appear by default. You can also though click on the Closed Caption link and then click View Full Transcript and that will give you a larger view of the transcript and not just the two lines that happen by default in Zoom.

>> JUDITH: Sam, I don't think we're unable to change our name. You may have unselected that as security.

>> SAMANTHA DICKINSON: Oh, have I.

(cell phone).

I will have to see if I can find out -- okay. So if I can't do that now, I'm not going to try to figure out how to change the security live in the meeting, so if you can place your name and DC in the chat, we'll do that for this week and I'll figure out how to give you the permissions to do that properly next week.

The third issue for administration for today is if you could please remember to state your name before you make a statement so that we have a full record of people's names and what they've said in the transcript when that's archived. Thank you. Over to you, Markus.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Thank you. Then let's go into the Agenda proper and I think the main issue on the agenda is the DC Main Session, and with that I hand it over to Jutta who has been driving this. Jutta, over to you, please.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Yes. Thank you, Markus. I was only driving that after the document was set up. So the first in the driver seat but then I had somehow taken over. We were expressing last week that we have done this analysis finding themes and subthemes, and somehow trying to find an order how individual dynamic coalitions could contribute to that overall theme that had been set and agreed on before, which is a Social Economic Renewal after the crisis or maybe also within the crisis because we don't know how long it will last, and the special role of dynamic coalitions and their work can take within the process of social economic renewal.

Sam, would you mind to share your screen with the analysis document with the Google Doc that you had already prepared?

>> SAMANTHA DICKINSON: One moment and I'll just get that up.

>> JUTTA CROLL: That would be fantastic.

>> SAMANTHA DICKINSON: I'm sorry. I always have 5 million screens open so trying to find it on the share screen takes me a bit.

(laughter).

>> JUTTA CROLL: Don't worry. Just take your name. Yes. Okay. Wonderful. So, thankfully, Samantha has transferred what we prepared in advance of the last meeting on very short notice, and this analysis of what we got from the substantive papers, which is put now into a Google Doc so that all of you can access the document. I do think the link was sent around before we had our call today, and that you could also have a look whether your dynamic coalition the one that you represent here on this call, is already put into the right place where you could talk about the work you're doing in regard of the pandemic, and especially the look into the future of how the work of your Dynamic Coalition would contribute to that socioeconomic renewal.

We do not see all dynamic coalitions listed here and that is due to the fact that not all dynamic coalitions had sent in a substantive paper. We said last week that we would keep it open a bit so that you could still contribute to that, and then also find your role within the main session. What I would like to remind you is that, really, the Dynamic Coalition Main Session, like all main sessions, need to fit into the program so that the character and style of the Dynamic Coalition Main Session needs to be, of course, that of a main session which means that we need to answer policy questions within our session, and we need to refer to issues of Internet governance, of course. So that's why we have structured this in a certain way.

We saw from the substantive papers that the digital divide was mentioned often as a very important point and that is somehow due to the fact that the pandemic has shown us like a burning lens that there is still a digital divide existent even in those areas of the world where some people were thinking before that maybe this topic was already addressed and the problem was solved. Now everybody has seen now that that's not the case. We still have a huge divide and it comes along the lines of social divides, and therefore it's very important to address the issue.

And you will see that in the document that we then come, of course, across fundamental rights, the right to access of information, which is of course a fundamental human right and therefore we have put these issues then as subthemes under Fundamental Rights.

And then Education, which somehow relates directly to the Fundamental Rights because access to education which is free is also a fundamental right. And then we would look at the end of the session into the future of the IGF.

If I may, I would still ask all Dynamic Coalition Representatives to give their input to that paper now. We should take some time within our call now to discuss further, but I would like to remind you that next Tuesday the MAG will have their next meeting, and at least by then, we need to report back from the Main Session of Dynamic Coalition and not to lose our slot because of not enough preparation for the session.

We are asked to name our speakers, and I'm not sure whether we can do that within that call today, but definitely we need to come shortly to a decision who would be the speakers and how they could contribute to the session. That's from my side so far, and I've spoken too much so I'm sorry for that.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: You have not, Jutta. Thank you. That's a very comprehensive overview. I see hands up, Michael and Olivier have their hands up. Michael first.

>> Michael oghia: Hill oa Michael here my hat is the dynamic case from the sustainability and news immediate yarks and this is especially to you Sam, you Jutta, and you Markus, but especially you Jutta, I'm so sorry that we still veantd submitted our paper but we will submit by COB today and I recognize that I'm so sorry that we're behind. Before we weren't sure if we kind of had something to contribute, but of course it's just been such a hectic time and I'm trying to push forward a lot of this kind of on my own -- not on my own, I mean, lots of support from my colleagues and also from the Co--coordinators but there is so much to get through at the moment, and so apologies, but know that we are going to submit by the end of today everything. I'm just having one of the co-coordinators and one of my colleagues review it finally before I submit, and then from there freedom of information is exactly what we're focusing on, and especially kind of the role of COVID as it relates to journalism and freedom of information. So, thank you for your patience, and I'm so, so sorry about the delay.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Thank you for that. And Olivier?

>> OLIVIER CREPIN-LEBLOND: Thanks, very much, Markus. Just a question and a thought, or yeah. So the question is, with regards to the subthemes, I understand so the main themes are set. Are the subthemes set, or are there additional subthemes?

>> JUTTA CROLL: These are the subthemes that we had collected so far during the call of last week, so I would say it's not a closed list of subthemes. We just need to have a look into whether it's all feasible within that duration of a main session, but of course that's still open.

>> OLIVIER CREPIN-LEBLOND: Yeah. Thank you. It's Olivier speaking. I had exactly that concern. I wanted more themes, but then looking at it, I'm thinking wait a minute, that's probably not the right way to go because there is a limited amount of time and we risk having the session going in all directions. It's already going to be pretty tough as it always is with the Dynamic Coalition since we all do so many different things.

With regards to the qarn tee values and I emailed you but wanted to say here as well, we would be happy to contribute on access, but we would be looking at things pretty much on a technical point of view, so access from a technical point of view and obviously an angle that is not there. And the other one is freedom of expression where our views are very complementary to the IRPC's views on this. Obviously, I mean the other thing is, of course, you know, you could always say we can speak on every topic there, but then it probably would be too much for one DC. And I was also going to mention that making sure that we do have a balance of DCs throughout the discussion. Thank you.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Yeah. If I just may give you a short answer, right. I don't think that the subthemes need to be addressed one by one, one after another. When you look at the digital divide and you have the two subthemes, access and discrimination, they are, of course, very much related to each other. So it's more that we have a complete overview of what we want to deal with. I also see that freedom of expression and freedom of information, of course, are somehow interrelated and that would not mean that someone would speak about freedom of expression and then the next and then the next and then the next. It needs to be, yes, referring to each other, also the subthemes.

>> OLIVIER CREPIN-LEBLOND: How do we volunteer? Do we type it into the document or do we let you know?

>> JUTTA CROLL: I don't want to be the whole organizer of that session. It's up to the dynamic coalitions to coordinate that. I'm just -- I think I'm in a role of a facilitator but not of the one who says okay you can speak and you can't. So it needs to be consent all among the Dynamic Coalition Members, and yeah, it's up to you to decide whether we have a role of 21 Dynamic Coalitions or not all have contributed up until now, but maybe a role of 12 or 13 Dynamic Coalitions who would speak one after another, or whether isn't it more topical to have people speaking in regard of a certain aspect, and then they maybe come in again so that it would be more like a panel discussion.

(cell phone).

>> OLIVIER CREPIN-LEBLOND: I think Jutta has been called.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Looks like it. I see that June and Mary also asked for the floor. June, why don't you go first.

>> JUNE PARRIS: Hi, hello, everyone. I just want to say on behalf of SIDS, the Small Island Development Dynamic Coalition we intend to submit something. We're in the same position as Michael as the IRPC, and we need to get to it and hopefully we'll work on that tomorrow and submit something by Monday, if that's okay with everyone. That's on behalf of SIDS and the IRPC both in the same position.

>> MARIANNE: This is Marianne here.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Can we take it, first Mary and then.

>> MARY: Hello everyone, this is Mary from ICIG and I see this on the education and future of IGF and that's precisely what we focused on in our position paper as this is what we prioritize for this year also taking into account the pandemic, so we would be happy to speak about those topics and what our DC has done during this year. And what we want to achieve in the future, of course.

And in terms of organizing the session, I would like to suggest that we divide the name that is allocated for the DC Main Session around the four themes and have maybe panels that will speak, like panels representing dynamic coalitions that will focus on, for instance, digital divide, and then we can turn into fundamental rights, and then education, and then in the end to future of IGF. And as several DCs are working on different themes, we can choose -- I mean, they can choose which one they want to prioritize more and then comment on the others that they are also working so that we don't have too many on a panel or have maybe up to four so that we can use the time allocated to the session more efficiently. (YCIG).

So that would be my suggestion to kind of structure the session and the time that we have allocated for it, so what do you think about this? Thank you.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Thank you. Amali next, please.

>> AMALI: Hello. This is Amali I'm from the coalition to data-driven health technologies, we have a poster and it's going to be a composition and it's about engaging the public to give their feedback on their interaction with their health care service provider or with the things such as the insurance company and so forth, so it's basically or it can be someone like a nurse or doctor as well, but it's about getting feedback from the public, so we have this poster and we want to launch it and we want to eventually have all the participants for next year and we'd like to present, but it's all of these various areas of fundamental rights, and some education because we want to start thinking, you know, how can they, you know, really think about their experience with their health care service provider, you know, and be able to talk to somebody during COVID, how did they get their information, and these kind of things. So once we launch it, we don't need much time, maybe 5 or 10 minutes to go over what it's about and to encourage participation, so that's what we are looking to do, please, if possible.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Well, thank you. Allow me to react a bit on the cuff. It sounds very interesting, but it sounds more like a individual presentation of a Dynamic Coalition and I wonder whether it be more or fit in better to a individual DC session as you all have one anyway this the people. Whereas, the Main DC Session should be to move to sored of a common discussion and to be less of individual presentations, but can I turn to Jutta on this as you are the main facilitator for the main session?

>> JUTTA CROLL: Yes. Thank you so much, Markus. I couldn't agree more with you that like I said before, main sessions should also be able to answer policy questions in regard of Internet governance and we had the experience with previous Internet governance forums when we had this common main session, and I do think the first time we tried to do that, it was like all dynamic coalitions marching on to a stage, one after another, and presenting one part of their work that they had done during the last year, and that was not very convincing and it was not very target oriented because it didn't bring out the commonalities and the added value that comes from the work of dynamic coalitions as part of the Internet Governance Forum ecosystem, and that was the reason why then a year later we tried to really find a common focus, and trying to bring dynamic coalitions into the situation that they contribute to this common focus and help to answer policy questions.

So, I'm not sure how the poster -- or so I understand that it's useful to gather answers to the questions you have, but I don't see really how it fits into the framework of such a main session like it should be.

And now that I -- okay. Then please just answer but I have another point to address from Meri, but maybe first you go ahead.

>> AMALI: May I just respond to that. That's fine. That's not a problem, but the one thing we would like to do is to bring in the consult value proposition so that would be the policy bit that we will address, so thank you.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Okay. Markus, would you like to respond again.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: I think we may need some further reflection about how to fit it in, but and this again, this is no criticism but Jutta also gave a little bit of the background. You know, we have this wide variety of dynamic coalitions and the challenge has always been to find a common ground that allows a common presentation, and this template up now is sort of a basis of a structure that we try to fit in, and there is not really -- the idea is not that we allow for a beauty contest among dynamic coalitions, but we should really gather to move towards a common answer to policy questions.

But there may be room for tweaking this, and also, you're new to this environment so if you do understand, that brings us to the next agenda item, the paper that I was proposing that we have not been very good at documenting the past and the history, and that doesn't make it that easy for new people in this environment to fit in, but I don't think we have to come to closure right now. We still have people who would like to say something. We have marijuanaa that is patience eptly waiting.

>> JUTTA CROLL: If I might.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Yes, please.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Please let me step in with an administrative issue. That is we have two people in the call, Leon and Daniel, and we would like to you type your name and affiliation to your Dynamic Coalition into the chat because after the last call we had already the issue that we didn't know your full name and we didn't know which dynamic coalition you represent, so if you would be so kind, Leon and Daniel to type your full name and your affiliation to a Dynamic Coalition into the chat, that would be really helpful.

Then going ahead with that planning, I do think that what Meri suggested is a very good idea that we have the session divided into these four themes and address each of the themes with a short -- with a panel of those people or Dynamic Coalition that are already listed for that theme. So then we could have 30 minutes for talking about the digital divide and we would have several people speaking to that issue, and then going on to the next point that would be Fundamental Rights, and we have people from other dynamic coalitions who would also speak up to these issues.

I do think that then we could come to a conclusion in the end and maybe it would not be each of the themes would be 30 minutes but maybe 20 minutes so that in the end we still have 30 minutes to answer these policy questions. And if we could agree to such a structure for the session, then we could better have a look into that issue with whether the poster and the questions fit into the structure and at what point of time that fits into that. Thank you, and I hand it over to marijuanaa.

>> MARIANNE: Oh, hi, yeah. Can you see or hear me because I'm on a tablet so I don't quite have the same --

>> MARKUS KUMMER: We can hear you very well.

>> MARIANNE: Can you see me? Is my video on. I'm marijuanaa Franklin and we also have June and M here from the steering committee but correct me if I'm wrong, I think you both are also representing other dynamic coalitions so just my hat today is just to support the meeting.

The IRPC I believe has sent in our paper, hence we're on the grid here. And June, June is going to be speaking for the IRPC, and as June changes her mind, so June not to put you on the spot but just to confirm we've already appointed our representative speaker and so we're working on that between now and the next request for substantive material, so just for the record for we could note that. And I think the idea of splitting the session into four groups because that provides some contours and I'm happy with that from where I'm sitting.

I think it would be good to think about moderation, particularly because it's online, and to note that if we have four different sections, that could we have a wrapping up, obviously, to make sure that there is time for wrapping up at the end of the main session so that some links can be drawn between the four clusters. That was just something to note.

And the Internet rights and principles coalitions meeting will focus on how these topics that we're covering in the DC Main Session relate to specifically Article 4 of the Charge of Human Rights and Principles for the Internet which is in fact the right to development, so the issues around COVID and the digital divide that I'm living through here in London, South London, the digital divide is live and well and all be it also we're going to join the dots between that meeting slot, the main session, and Michael is coordinating our workshop on the environment and sustainability, so that's how we're hopefully contributing to the connections between all of these various sessions so that they're not isolated instances but that each one can also provide focus and substantive content.

So and last point, I thought last year the Main Session in Berlin, on paper it looked like just a parade of dynamic coalitions but in fact I think it was a very productive session because we concentrated on content and I think that is something that we can do this year with the planning we're doing so far. Thanks so much, Jutta, and Markus, of course.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Okay. Then do we have any further comments in regard of the Main Session? I really would like to suggest that those dynamic coalitions who have already announced that they will prepare something, and of course we appreciate to get your substantive papers, about you given the short time that we have until Tuesday, I would be very happy if you could contribute also directly to the document and put in your Dynamic Coalition's name for all of those themes and subthemes that you would like to address. That would be helpful. Thank you.

Markus, should we then continue with the agenda or do we needs to say anything more about the main session?

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Well, I think it seems to be coming together, and that there is agreement to -- at least how I sense it, to Meri's suggestion and based on your structure to have different segments with different panels. I don't know whether we need to go further down that road right now, or whether we can -- we don't have much time. We really need to have something that we can present. The next call is next Tuesday, I think.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Yes, it's next Tuesday, and we also need to put the content into the IGF schedule so that people are already browsing around the schedule to see what they can expect from that session because I've seen many people have already registered for several sessions, so they might not go through the whole schedule again and then we would miss people who could be interested in our session. Therefore, I really agree that we should put that out as soon as possible. And what Marianne said, do we have any suggestion for moderator? The last session we had two moderators, one female and one male, and I do think that was a very good solution and I would be very happy for you to send in some suggestions on who could be able to moderate the session.

If you don't feel up to do that right now, then maybe we just add a column or a line to the table where people can type in suggestions for moderators, and then we'll review that within the next few days so that we come to a conclusion, and that could be done also via the mailing list.

>> Jutta. This is Meri speaking can I jump in. Ifts going to say something that Olivier put in the chat, that (?) and Michael did such a wonderful job last year that I would be delighted to have them again, perhaps if one is not available then at least the other. Yes, so that's my contribution.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Thanks. Michael is already on the call, and I don't know -- I haven't seen Tatiana for a while around and I don't know if anyone has been in contact with her and could ask if she's available.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: I think last year she signaled that she was trying to take a step back, but we can always ask her, of course, and I totally agree. I mean, on the principle of never change a winning team, and Tatiana and Michael are a winning team, so shall we ask her again and see if she's available?

>> JUTTA CROLL: Yes. Of course.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: We cannot lose. I mean, she may say, no, and then okay then we have to look for someone else.

>> But then Michael is on the call. What do you say, Michael?

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Is Michael ready?

>> Michael: Hi, everyone, Michael here. Well --

>> I'm sorry I'm assisting and putting you on the spot!

>> Michael: Thank you though for your badge of confidence, but at the same time especially because it has to deal with more on the economies, the economic side of things and what not, Olivier, I mean, you're an entrepreneur, you've been working in the private sector for years as well as the technical community. Do you feel like this is something that you would be able to speak more to -- from I'm not a business person at all so I don't know.

>> OLIVIER CREPIN-LEBLOND: Michael, the problem is I'm representing one of the DCs so I can't wear the two hats.

>> Michael: Well, I see. Well then I suppose we have an answer unless anybody can come up with another name. If there is no other name, then I would be very happy to. But at the same time I'm also moderating one of the main sessions so also if anybody else would like to give visibility to someone else, I'm very happy to accommodate that as well; especially, somebody that may have a little bit more insight -- yes, to the environment session, I'm sorry -- but if anybody has any more insight into the economic background or something like that, that would be fine as well.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Michael, you raise an important point, if you're already moderating a main session, we really should try to diversify to the extent possible. So, you know, it's always a criticism that it's always the same people, and however good they are, but we shouldn't try to push them too much, so it's very noble of you to point that out and not search the lime light, but it is a valid point. I think we should not abuse too much of the same people for moderating the main session, but can you think of someone, or maybe you don't have to come up an answer now, but can we leave it in your able hands maybe to go through the list of potential candidates?

>> JUTTA CROLL: Does anyone know whether Timmy Ashuto is moderating already a main session. I do think she's part of an organizing team but I don't think she's moderating and she would be an economy person.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: She's excellent as well, yes.

>> JUTTA CROLL: But then we would need a female co-moderator for her to have a couple again.

>> MICHAEL SHORT: Hi, everyone. Michael here. DC sustainability. I will definitely keep it in mind, and Markus I'll make a note and think about it as well, but obviously any additional thoughts are welcome and, of course, please keep me in mind as a backup in that sense. I'll be very happy if all else fails, of course, I can step in but I support the idea of reaching out to Timea and potentially having or inviting somebody to co-facilitate with her that could potentially have quite a different perspective, so we just try to get different takes involved, different perspectives involved.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Actually what worked well was Tatiana was not really involved in any of the Dynamic Coalition so it gave her a very objective view of somebody that looked at it from the outside which is a good perspective to have and she did a very good job.

We can approach and actually there is nothing wrong with having, shall we see, a female overbalance, two female moderators. I don't think there would be anything wrong with that either.

>> JUTTA CROLL: No. No. Of course not.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: There are too many males on this environment, so nothing wrong if you find two good and they are excellent women, so we can approach them and if they would agree.

>> Michael: Michael here, everyone, I'm sorry to the captioner, let's just say that I will definitely not disagree with that, Markus. I think that's a great idea, and I really do think that Timea would be a wonderful person to reach out to, even if she's already involved with a organizing team. That's very separate from being front and center on camera in the middle of the session, so I think that's a good thing. Markus, would you like to -- I don't -- I mean, I have met her before but very, very briefly. I tonight know her well. Does anybody here very comfortable interacting with her? Does anybody know her well and would be willing to reach out to Timea.

>> Hi. Michael we're on environment together, and yeah I know Timea because we're also on the business group, the business working group, the MAG (this is June). Yeah. I can probably send an email.

>> Michael: That works for me. Jutta, mark kus is that okay?

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Yes, of course.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Of course, definitely.

>> Michael: Great. June, why don't you reach out to Timea and in the meantime perhaps we can think of someone else that would be able to join. I highly recommend co-moderating because for a session this long with so many individuals and perspectives involved, I really think it would be better to spread that load over two people as opposed to just putting it on one.

>> JUNE PARRIS: Yeah. We'll see how she's -- she's got a lot like me, she's got a lot going on. We'll see if she's free. If she's free for that, and I'll send a message anyway and find out if she's free for that session and go from there.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: I'm happy to reach out to Tatiana to see whether she's willing and able to commit herself.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Sounds like a perfect solution.

>> OLIVIER CREPIN-LEBLOND: It's Olivier speaking, concerning Tatiana the wonderful thing of the Internet, while you're listening you can also use your hands to type. She says she's fine with -- she'd be happy to co-chair this if she's available at the time. She has to check her calendar because she's teaching these days as well, so there might be a clash with her teachings, but she's available and she'd be happy to. It's informal and you can formally now.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Thank you for that Olivier, you beat us all. That's efficiency for you. Okay. That makes the job very easy.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Okay then.

>> OLIVIER CREPIN-LEBLOND: So she'll get back to us regarding the availability but she's got the date.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Excellent. Thanks for that, Olivier!

Shall we move on with the agenda? Have we done enough for the main session, Jutta?

>> JUTTA CROLL: Yes, I do think so. So we are waiting for dynamic coalitions to work on the Google Doc so that we have over the weekend finished that, and then we can report back to the MAG on Tuesday, and probably also put up a list of speakers and rough program into the schedule. Thank you.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Excellent. With that, we can move on in the agenda. The DC Cooperation is the next issue. That brings us back to the origins when we started to have these calls, and you will recall, I think that was in Joa, the first DC Main Session and we started then having regular calls after that, and we also agreed on some common principles like open lists, open archives, open membership, that whoever wants to join a Dynamic Coalition should be allowed to join and that the archives will be open and the memberships will be open.

Now, we do have an smoo with one particular Dynamic Coalition where one individual member claims that he has been excluded, and without going into the details I think at this stage, I mean, we will try to set up a call to solve this in a friendly and professional way, but I think it is important to recall the importance of these principles, and I'm not suggesting that we now say who was right and who was wrong, but we look more forward that we; A, reaffirm that all dynamic coalitions agree to the principles; and B, that maybe we also agree on principles to find out of potential disputes.

One of the weaknesses you may say of these common principles that we have found agreed to common rules but we have not set up -- we have a rulemaking mechanism, but we don't have a rule-enforcing mechanism, as we left it to a large extent to the Secretariat to make sure that the dynamic coalitions abide by the rules, but we have not thought in advance of what happens if there is somebody who accuses a Dynamic Coalition of not abiding by the rules, how should we solve the problem.

And I don't know, Jutta, whether you would like to jump in from here?

>> JUTTA CROLL: Yes, of course, I can do so. Yeah. The question was whether it would be consensual for the dynamic coalitions that so far in case that you face issues either among the members or with organizational issues like a mailing list that you could turn to the Secretariat who would then try to -- try to address the issue, or maybe also set up a mailing list by the Secretariat for a Dynamic Coalition. We've seen that sometimes it might also be an issue that a mailing list is set up with a certain organization by one of the members of the dynamic coalition and then when things are changing, that might also cause problems for the mailing list. Therefore, the suggestion would be that we somehow engage the Secretariat in these issues, and it has been the case that usually the dynamic coalitions are -- need to give evidence to the Secretariat that they fulfill the criteria for running a dynamic coalition so we thought it might be a good idea also to have the Secretariat in a neutral position to help sort out certain issues. If it comes to that case. And then on the other hand, we don't want to load additional burdens on the IGF Secretariat because we already know that they are overburdened with so many things to do, but at least as a last resort in case things could not be solved, that would be a suggestion.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Thank you, Jutta. Yes, and to essentially having the mailing list is part of the conditionalities for setting up a Dynamic Coalition. But in this particular case, if a mailing list doesn't seem to work properly and if there is questions of being excluded or not, that we could start from scratch and ask the Secretariat to set up a mailing list. I don't know whether Sam who works for the Secretariat could comment, but I also see that Marie-Laure would like to come in on this. Please.

>> MARIE-LAURE: Thank you for raising this, when Jutta was talking and you were talking about complex mechanism and I'm looking at Olivier on the screen and heavily involved with ICANN, and what came to my mind is the moderator operating with ICANN and where there is some kind of ombudsman where all of these sorts of, you know, concerns, tensions, however you call it. When there is someone that wants to complain about something, and believe they in ICANN, it's like daily business, I would say. They go to this person, and perhaps it's surprising to me that the IGF doesn't have such -- not that I'm hoping that there aren't that many complaints, but yes, I think it's kind of a weakness that over the years, I know -- well perhaps it's good news also, because it shows that there aren't that many problems, but there should be some kind of internal mechanism to deal with those complaints, that's for one.

For the other, I'm discovering which I didn't know, that is it possible for the Secretariat to support us, and if we are experimenting, technical problems with the mailing list, let's say, for a range of reasons. Could we ask administrative support and ask the Secretariat to host the mailing lists? Is there possible?

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Thank you, Meriel awrk u refreshing. I think the ombudsman is making the point I tried to make, that we have not come up with some sort of neutral arbitration mechanism and the idea that the Secretariat would maybe provide technical support, obviously, I don't think it would be too far stretched to provide to every single dynamic coalition but in case of a problem, I hope that it would be possible. Sam, could you maybe off the cuff, give a reaction to that without leaning too much out of the window? We don't want you to fall out of the window.

>> SAMANTHA DICKINSON: Hi. It's Sam here. There are actually a couple of dynamic coalitions that do have their mailing lists hosted on the IGF Mail System, so, yes, I think that others could also be hosted that way.

The other thing that people are using increasingly is Google Groups as a way of managing their mailing lists, so there are two different options that are available.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Okay. Thank you for that. But if there is a precedent for the Secretariat hosting it, I think that could be a very good way out.

Olivier's suggestion whether the United Nations ombudsman, it's definitely a potential way to look at it, but I'm not sure because the UN is, essentially, an organization of Member States and the IGF is a multistakeholder environment and whether the UN Ombudsman would be actually equipped to deal with the multistakeholder ecosystem. I mean, this is -- it is slightly different from the nation-state system.

>> OLIVIER CREPIN-LEBLOND: It might well be the UN ombudsman is not quite ready for the crazy people they might encount in a multistakeholder system.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: I didn't say that, but it is a different ecological system. (Laughing). But in any case, I see that there will be broad support for turning to the Secretariat for providing technical solutions to allow this Dynamic Coalition move forward with a mailing list that would not be disputed, and I think we don't have that much time left, actually. Unless there are other comments on this issue, then I would like to move on to the next agenda item.

I sent yesterday a draft that I had produced after our last call trying to provide some terms of reference for the need for a document, of a paper that would document the history, the achievements of the dynamic coalitions because dynamic coalitions, to a large extent, are a little bit of an unknown entity in the IGF ecosystem, and there is no sort of single overview. Each Dynamic Coalition may have their own document, but we don't have a comprehensive overview document, and based on the last call, I felt there was a broad consensus among the dynamic coalitions that it be useful to have such a document that would provide this kind of overview that would be helpful also for new dynamic coalitions. It would provide guidance to new dynamic coalitions that are in the process of being formed, and it could also look forward to precisely address questions that we just said. We need rule enforcement, rules person, ombudsman, whatever, and this last but not least, would also be helpful in informing the deliberation on the IGF Plus Model, so I sent out the paper, which was co-edited by both Jutta and Sam, and we think it would be a good starting point.

We know we will not agree on everything, but we also think that we collectively ought to push for having more Secretariat support as the dynamic coalitions are, I think, recognized by most as being a key intersessional pillar of the IGF, as important as the NRIs or BPFs, but they, yes, they are autonomous, they are self-organized, but they would also benefit from more Secretariat support, such as support Sam is providing, but it's -- it's not -- I'm saying not with your left hand but more with your small finger of your left hand based on your contract. You have many more other tasks to fulfill, and you are not allowed much time to provide support to the dynamic coalition so more support would definitely be welcome, and such a paper I think would also need Secretariat support, such as the paper on the BPFs that we have produced which is available and I encourage you to look at it if you have not done so, but this is a useful input of taking it a step further and we will not be able to do much work before this IGF, but at least that we put it on the table and say that this is something that should be done, and we could also take it then in the various sessions of the IGF, such as the discussions on the IGF Plus Model where we can table it and say that this should be done, and that we look at what has been achieved and what can be improved and what should be the next steps for the dynamic coalitions to be taken.

I have talked too much and I don't expect to come to a conclusion now, but the next suggestion is that we put it up as a Google Document and also maybe provide a template where you can fill in and document your own history and your achievements, but I see that Marianne is itching to say something.

>> MARIANNE: I'm sorry. I have to rush to the next meeting, but Markus could I suggest that we also pull on some of the academic research that is being done that is actually already starting to create histories of the dynamic coalitions and one of the main sources is my own, I must say that, 2013 in my book Digital Dilemma chapter 5 is all about the dynamic coalitions at the Internet Governance Forum and in fact I would hazard to guess the only historical account, because at the time I was a researcher rather than the role you know me as. But this is not the only one, there are also a couple of PhD projects if not publications from the PhD projects that also address directly some of the granular history, so I think to help the paper it would be very good to have those sources there. After all, the Internet Governance Forum is also populated by many engaged academic, of which I'm just one, I'm not the only one, and this is a chance to link the academic work, the research work with obviously our own view of our own historical background, and the history needs to be written, I hope by diverse voices. I would just like to offer that. It's not just self-promotion. This research is very important to the IGF's profile in the public-facing profile, and I would like to see ution making use of our research outputs, my own and those of these younger scholars who have been spending a lot of time watching and listening, and they could also teach us something, and I think that would be something I'd like to put to the table.

I'll send the references that I have of the new projects. I'll check in with those students -- they're not my students who have just got the adopted titles if they have any publications. I hope that's an acceptable proposal to our meeting because I find the parallel paths of referencing could be unproductive and I would like to see the paths start to cross over each other, and I would like to see research and Civil Society documents talk to each other in the reference lists. I'd like to see governmental organizations and intergovernmental organizations access, cite, refer to, and learn from not only research but also Civil Society documents, so that to me would be just something that we could actually pioneer, given the demographics of our dynamic coalitions.

So I'd like to hear what people think of that before I disappear rather than drop this and then just go. Thank you.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Well, I can definitely give you my first reaction, which is totally positive. I mean, that's the whole idea that this paper would actually do the necessary research to bring together the already-existing papers and research into one document, and any help to guide us toward existing documents, and I think collectively we can do a lot of work. And Sam already said in the chat that she will create a Google Doc where you actually can also fill in your own contributions to the collective history and give also the relevant hints as to existing papers that already are out there, and Jutta, you would like to say something?

>> JUTTA CROLL: Yes. I just wanted to say Marianne that it's a pity that she couldn't join that call that we had with Anriette in regard to dynamic coalitions and forums and IGF Plus Model because that was one of the discussions we had there where we do need to know more about dynamic coalitions and their purpose and their history in order to define their role in the IGF Plus Model, so I'm so happy that you can contribute to that, Marianne, so that would be really helpful, I do think.

>> MARIANNE: Yeah. I think this is it. I think some people know some of the literature and other people know other literature, so yes, point taken Jutta, but I can't be everywhere all the time I'm afraid. It's the problem we all have.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Yeah. And we're running out of time now.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: It could be an exciting project for some junior academic or so to, you know, to write and hold the pen on such a project in such a document.

>> MARIANNE: I'll keep that in mind. I just do need to go, people, I'm terribly sore have too many hats today.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: I think we already overstretched the time and on top of the hour and we will not be able to conclude that but I just wanted to put it on the table and it's always good to have a first draft document, and it is now on a Google Doc, and Sam put that in. And also provide a framework, and we can maybe refine the Google Doc, but the idea would also be that you bring up your own history, your own achievements, and there have been a lot of achievements of the dynamic coalitions, but collectively, also, and that goes not just for the dynamic coalitions, but the IGF has never been very good at self-publicizing its success stories, and there have been success stories, so let's not be shy about that.

Is there anything else we need to discuss? We don't have much time left. We're already over time. Jutta?

>> JUTTA CROLL: No. Nothing from my side. I do think we are done for today, and looking forward to receive more input to both Google Docs that are running now for the Learning Coalitions.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Do we need another to call before the IGF maybe?

>> JUTTA CROLL: Yeah, I do think we need to fine tune the program for the main session, so probably it's best to have the MAG call next week and then we would have much information on how everything is going on. The start of the IGF, that is on November 2, so maybe we could have a meeting not next but then the other week.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: What about two weeks from now?

>> JUTTA CROLL: I'm afraid I have to say I won't be available that Friday due to a whole-day meeting with the German Government, but maybe we set up just a Doodle and try to find a time and date when it works?

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Okay.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Or I could do that Friday but only later in the afternoon, maybe around 5:00 Geneva time which would be 3:00 p.m. UTC then.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: That should be okay. Yeah? Can we go for that?

>> SAMANTHA DICKINSON: Just looking at -- I'm sorry, Sam here, just looking at the calendar, in two week's time that is the 30th of October just before IGF starts and I think when everyone is going to be running around like little chickens.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: They won't be traveling.

>> SAMANTHA DICKINSON: No, but I can tell you I will be doing lots of work.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Okay. Then maybe a bit earlier that week, yes?

>> SAMANTHA DICKINSON: Yes, or I mean is it possible that if we have the MAG call on next Tuesday, which is the 20th, maybe to do this again.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Next Friday?

>> SAMANTHA DICKINSON: Which is the 23rd, which then gives a week for any last-minute, we still need to do things.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Fine with me.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Okay. Shall we settle for that? Next Friday same time? 13:00 UTC.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Wonderful.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Have you already moved to wintertime, it would be 14:00?

>> JUTTA CROLL: No, it will be the weekend before the IGF starts that we turn into wintertime.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Okay. So still 13:0 0 UTC. In any case 15:00 central European summertime.

>> Judith: UTC never changes, it's always 13:00, everything else changes.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: I know UTC stays the same, yes, but just to be on the same, it may not work for Jutta or whatever, but as we know 3:00 central European summertime is okay and presumably still 13:00 UTC, yeah.

>> JUTTA CROLL: Yes. Okay. Thank you so much and have a nice weekend all of you. Bye-bye.

>> Buy all.

>> Thank you. Bye-bye.

>> MARKUS KUMMER: Good call. Thank you. Bye-bye.

Contact Information

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) 229 173 411