[WSIS CS-Plenary] CS structure diagram now online

[Thomas Ruddy]

Dear readers,
After all the controversy surrounding the Open Office
format of Chris Nicol's CS structure diagram, I have
converted it to PDF and uploaded it onto this site I
manage, http://www.wsis.ethz.ch

Regards,
Thomas

--- Chris Nicol <cnicol at pangea.org> wrote:
> Subject: Re: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] tunis meeting
> From: Chris Nicol <cnicol at pangea.org>
> To: WSIS CS Plenary list <plenary at wsis-cs.org>
> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 21:11:08 +0100
> 
> This time with the attachment.  8-)
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2004-02-18 at 20:55, Chris Nicol wrote:
> > On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 11:37, wolfgang at imv.au.dk
> wrote:
> > > Dar all,
> > > 
> > > It should be clear (also for the Tunis
> organizers) that the "main organ" of CS is the CS
> Plenary. CS-P has two arms, "C&T" for Content (based
> on a broad range of WG and Caucuses) and the
> "Bureau" for Procedures. The so-called "C&T Liaison"
> is a full member of the Bureau. It is important to
> explain this "simple structure" to the newcomers
> from the very early day to avoid any
> misunderstanding. CS is organized bottom up. The
> Bureau does not take content related decisions. It
> facilitates the communications between other bodies
> and stakeholders and the different families,
> caucuses wg etc. of the Civil Society and deals with
> formal aspects (which room is needed when, which
> speaking slots should be reserved, when we should
> have a meeting with the intergovernmental office
> etc.)
> > 
> > Yes. I think it's also useful to see how the two
> kinds of groups,
> > families (Bureau) and Caucuses (Content and
> Themes) differ. The families
> > are organised more according to the origin of
> their members: trade
> > unions; regions; NGOs; women; youth; cities and
> local authorities; think
> > tanks, etc. ie constituencies, similar to the
> governments, who
> > supposedly represent their own national
> constituencies. The caucuses are
> > organised around areas of interest: human rights;
> gender; internet
> > governance; patents, copyright and trademarks;
> regions, indigenous
> > peoples, etc. People from many different
> areas/constituencies of CS can
> > be members of the same working group.
> > 
> > The constituencies could be fine as a basis for
> organising CS if there
> > were some mechanism for formalising this
> representation. But we don't go
> > to Prepcomms with a mandate from our
> constituencies. We try to represent
> > them as best we can, but there are no elected
> representatives from the
> > broader trade union movement, nor representatives
> of all women, nor all
> > youths, nor have think tanks had a congress and
> sent delegates, etc.
> > This would be impossible. CS representivity in
> WSIS has relied more on
> > good will and motivation than on formal
> structures.
> > 
> > But the problem is more than this. When we were
> working at the
> > Prepcomms, we worked on issues, with other people
> who shared our
> > interest, in structures that didn't correspond to
> our "constituencies",
> > with the exceptions of gender, youth, regions,
> etc. So the "families"
> > were sometimes (often?) more of a burden than a
> help in getting the work
> > done. Some hardly ever met, just placing their
> faith in their elected
> > reps. The family structure, which on paper looks
> democratic, was often
> > less so in practice. It was more often the
> caucuses and working groups
> > where we got to know each other, shared ideas and
> meals, created trust
> > and confidence, etc, and thrashed out the issues
> and wrote critiques
> > together.
> > 
> > I doubt that the families were set up as a
> counterweight to the
> > caucuses, but in my opinion the latter were often
> more important. But
> > the Bureau is the "official"  structure, modeled
> on the governments' own
> > structure, so it's the one the UN and the
> Tunisians can (relatively)
> > easily recognise. But only recognising the
> families clearly leads to
> > problems when in practice a lot of CS identifies
> more with their
> > caucuses. Maybe just an explanation would help the
> Tunisian government.
> > 
> > > It would be helpful to write a self-explaining
> one-pager (with an Organizational Chart) for
> distribution in Tunis. 
> > 
> > Attached is a first draft of an organisational
> chart I began a while
> > ago. It's in Open Office drawing format. If anyone
> can convince me that
> > they can't download Open Office (or get a CD) and
> install it to read the
> > file (in Windows or in Linux), (and in the process
> start using free
> > software), I'll see what I can do about making an
> image file of it or
> > sending them a CD with the Open Office
> installation on it. 
> > http://www.openoffice.org
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Chris
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > Best
> > > 
> > > wolfgang
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -- Original Nachricht--
> > > Von: Rikke Frank Joergensen <rfj at humanrights.dk>
> > > An: plenary at wsis-cs.org
> > > Senden: 11:12 AM
> > > Betreff: [WSIS CS-Plenary] tunis meeting
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Hi, 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > I am glad to see that C&T is a "born"
> participant in the
> > > Tunis meeting, according to the information from
> Renata. 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > However, its still worrying that the family
> structure is the point
> > > of access for CS at a meeting that will
> undoubtedly deal with both process and
> > > content. And that effective means for
> participation in this 2. phase will be so
> > > limited due to financial constrains on CS. 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > Rikke
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Plenary mailing list
> > > Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> > >
>
http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
> -- 
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 2 application/vnd.sun.xml.draw
name=WSIS_CS_structure.sxd