Re: [DC] DC liaisons to the MAG

[Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond]

Dear Markus,

for the record, on behalf of the DC Core Internet Values, I am in support.
Kindest regards,

Olivier Crépin-Leblond

On 16/10/2025 11:32, MARKUS KUMMER wrote:

Dear all,

In yesterday's DCCG meeting we agreed to submit a proposal to the MAG with the request to have formal representation of DCs in the MAG meetings. The objective is a  better integration of the DCs work in the IGF programme and structure and to create more formal recognition of the DCs' output. You find a link with access to the full document below.

We have four suggestions for improvement:

• Enabling the messages and outcomes from the DCs to be heard;
• Including two liaisons from the DCs in the MAG-meetings;
• Support for DC and DCCG output
• Distribution and integration of DCs work into the IGF mainstream.

The request is for recognised representation of an advisory nature and not a seat on the MAG.

Avri Doria (DC-SIG) and Wout de Natris - van der Borght (IS3C) have volunteered to be the first representatives.

As not all of you were on the DCCG call, you may wish to comment on this proposal. Without hearing from you we will assume to have your tacit agreement and I will submit the proposal to the MAG Chair on Monday morning for consideration at the next MAG meeting.

The proposal can be found at:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uMaeScekpIi2bqmvX89rkjQoL-lIcuhcvrz79zveet0/edit?usp=sharing

Best regards

Markus

_______________________________________________
DC mailing list
D...@intgovforum.org
To unsubscribe or manage your options please go to http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/dc_intgovforum.org

[Alejandro Pisanty]

Olivier,

totally in support here - good work, good move! 

Alejandro Pisanty

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "coreinternetvalues" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to coreinternetval...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/coreinternetvalues/3d045634-9237-454d-b74f-39d60637d170%40gih.com.

--

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
     Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
Facultad de Química UNAM
Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
+525541444475
Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .

[Yik Chan Chin]

Yes, I totally agree with the proposal. This is a long-overdue step to make the IGF governance more inclusive, transparent and accountable.

 It should be a bottom-up process. 

Best,

Yik Chan

[Alejandro Pisanty]

Hi,

I agree - this is a most needed and overdue measure. Liaisons are a definite "must"; I hope we are choosing wisely - able negotiators with the whole DC landscape in their minds. 

At some point we should have a meeting with them and also have some transparency and access into their designations but that said, the choices presents are "go!"

We should endeavor in our intersessional work to have a time slot to discuss this and other organizational / administrative issues. A meeting is long overdue too. 

Olivier's work on the DC's website gives us one more springboard for this  Let's use it!

Alejandro Pisanty

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/coreinternetvalues/CAK%2BxBCh0pTrGBvwp5ic1n-AExqA5KpY3Hh3vF7E21B-96ed5%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Markus Kummer]

Dear all,

The email Olivier circulated reflects the situation of 15 October 2025. But at yesterday’s meeting the was no consensus to submit it in this for to the new MAG.

Best regards

Markus

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/coreinternetvalues/CAOxRbV9rLNxsrCiQZvnWMk0On%3DzdJfTReMPxp41F7WgdDir6Yw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Roberto Gaetano]

Hi all

Let me start by apologising for not having attended the latest call.

On the matter under discussion, I believe that Alx raises a good point about organisational issues.

I have no objection at all to the people who have volunteered to be DC Liaisons: I have complete trust in Avri and Wout. In the initial phase, appointment of the volunteers is the best choice.

However, once the “urgent” problem of having this liaison role covered solved, we should take the time develop a more solid governance model. For instance, to design a process for elections of the liaisons.

This might not be a simple action of “launching a poll" or a "vote”, but should include some preliminary activities, like the way to present one candidature (do we need a nomination and a second?), disclosure of the activities performed by the candidates and their potential conflict of interest, a clarification of the electorate (one DC, one vote, and do the “dormant” DCs lose their right of vote).

I am not at all a process guy, I believe that there is no point in defining a complicated structure if the organization fails to enjoy the driving force given by volunteers, but there are moments in life when a reflection on “the way we are doing things” is necessary. And I believe that this is the moment, building not only on the results achieved so far, but also on the recognition by the MAG. May I incidentally note that this recognition was not something that we could take for granted just a few months ago.

Cheers,

Roberto

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/coreinternetvalues/CAOxRbV9rLNxsrCiQZvnWMk0On%3DzdJfTReMPxp41F7WgdDir6Yw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Pari Esfandiari]

Thanks all — I support the idea of DC liaisons to the MAG. It feels like an important and overdue step if we want the work of Dynamic Coalitions to be better connected to the IGF’s broader processes. DCs often produce some of the most substantive and forward-looking discussions, but too often that work remains at the margins. Better integration would strengthen both the DCs and the IGF itself.

At the same time, I agree with Roberto and Alejandro that this should also prompt a wider conversation about governance. Starting with trusted volunteers makes sense as a practical first step; meanwhile, we must begin work to establish clear selection processes and criteria, alongside well-defined duties, responsibilities, and expectations for the liaison role. If DCs are to have a more formal advisory function, transparency, accountability, and legitimacy will be essential to making this work effectively and credibly.  

For me, the bigger issue here is how we strengthen the link between dialogue and action. If this helps create a stronger pathway for DC outputs to feed into the IGF mainstream, then it would be a very positive development.

Cheers, 
Pari

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/coreinternetvalues/DE102C95-0FCD-4438-BEAD-AFCF47A1BED1%40hotmail.com.

--

Pari Esfandiari

President

Global TechnoPolitics Forum 

Pario - Architects of Ideas

in...@TechnoPolitics.org

Linkedin Profile

Tel: 

 US       :+1-202-735-1415 (Office)

 US       : +1-310-435-0888 (Cell)

 Europe: +30-694-1607131 (Cell)

 UK       : +44-731-210-4049 (Cell)

[Markus Kummer]

Dear Roberto, all,

The point you are making about organisation al issues. We have been try<ing for the past five years or so to strengthen the organisational cooperation among DCs and the fact that the DCs have been recognised by the WSIS+20 outcome documents is no mean result of this improved cooperation. However, much more could and should be done in this regards. 

The solution you are proposing however would not fly, as we have no consensus to move forward on that basis.

Best regards

Markus

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/coreinternetvalues/DE102C95-0FCD-4438-BEAD-AFCF47A1BED1%40hotmail.com.

[Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi]

I am in full support and wish our liaisons the best of luck.

 

Hadia Elminiawi

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/coreinternetvalues/8250FE6A-3D79-49DF-8C2A-583EB7E6CE0B%40gmail.com.