Input Documents/Links:
- Draft Agenda for the IGF 2020 Second Open Consultations and MAG Meeting (working version with comments is here)
- IGF 2020 Timeline (last update: 12 February)
- IGF 2020 Workshop Evaluation Statistics (preliminary)
- Report from the latest call of the WG-Language
- WG-WSP output
* Poll details
For the breakout groups following the plenary on First Day of MAG Meeting, what option do you prefer?
Option 1 - Plenary discussion invites views on the recommendations of the Evaluation Groups and what this could mean for integrating the four sets of recommendations into a single balanced set of approved workshop proposals (e.g. what proportion or number of slots should be allocated to each track). MAG will breakout sessions into their existing Evaluation Groups, with those unable to join the session having a short window to provide comments in writing. The aim of the breakout is for each Evaluation Group to respond to the feedback, e.g. revise the sub-themes, adjust the number or ranking of workshops in the green basket to decide which of that track’s proposals should be approved.
OR
Option 2 - Plenary discussion in principle accepts the recommendations of each Evaluation Group and focuses discussion on how to translate the four sets of Evaluation Group recommendations into a single balanced set of approved workshop proposals. The breakout sessions are a series of MAG discussions (each MAG member tries to join one) which aims to reflect on Plenary discussion and come up with suggestions for the make-up of the final set of approved workshop proposals. Members will be clustered into breakout groups according to regions/timezones. Each group has to agree on 3 or 4 sets of suggestions which will then be presented to the Plenary on Day 2, possibly with the Chair proposing a way forward that reflects the proposals received.