Dear Jason, thank you for expressing your personal point of view
Dear compas

I agree that projects are different, some are working full time,  
others mobilize only the com com team, others are inserted in the  
budget despite of no consensus. Let us try not to draft the budget  
according to personal convictions or involvement in projects but  
according to whether or not they are solid proposals that deserve to  
be supported.

Your question whether Ciranda is a media or a platform is a good point  
but not relevant for now. As an open space inside the wsf process, its  
character of being a mixture of a media and a platform is a result of  
collective experiences, not an imposed standard.

Our project for 2011 is described in the last message to com com. The  
work we are doing is in wsf.ciranda.net, until we finalize the report  
of our 2010 activities. And yes, we really would like to debate with  
IC on what should be the Com Com policies in a conceptual and  
political way.

We have been supporting the Com Com efforts despite of our marathon of  
websites, starting with the wsf2008.net, discarded after enormous  
collective efforts. And then openfsm, and now wsfinfo...

Given this creative spirit, but sometimes slightly erratic policies of  
Com Com, Ciranda feel strongly responsible for protecting and ensuring  
respect for the platform that keeps doing its nonstop and  
collaborative job. If that should be improved, come to do it with us!

About the roles of the office and Com Com, I honestly feel that part  
of the reason for the difficulties we have in working together and  
sharing activities is the way in which people from Com Com sometimes  
behave in relation to the operational activities and the freedom of  
choice of the team responsible for the website, database, newsletters,  
etc. Nobody survives our eager approach!

I think the role of Com Com should be to establish criteria, and  
afterwards evaluate whether they were achieved.

I can chat since tomorrow, in the morning, but with some restriction  
at mondays

See you
friendly,
Rita



Citando Jason Nardi <jason.nardi@...>:

> Hola Salete, Helio y todos,
>
> muito bem.  For me tomorrow (24/9) or the day after are both fine.
>
> I think we must be very concrete in order to release the first budget
> draft, but also start defining how to approach the discussion beyond
> that.
>
> Therefore I ask to suggest immediately:
>
> 1. what should be the indicative cost we would need to cover both for
> the portal development part and the database (considering there should
> be budget reserved for it this year as well), whatever we decide who
> will manage it.
>
> 2. based on previous experiences, what costs implications would the
> organisation of an International Seminar on the Communication of the
> WSF in Dakar have and who we could involve in co-sponsoring such
> event.  We could also have a session more focused on the commission's
> work.
>
>
> Helio, just to be clear: myself and others have raised the question of
> the role/scope of the wsf office and its relationship to commissions
> and to the wsf process many times, almost in every IC meeting - both
> when it coincided with the "secretariat" and in its actual
> configuration - as the form of the wsf process changed and
> decentralised (or policentralised...) throughout the years.  It wasn't
> just questioning "power" relations or a methodology of work, but also
> considering the available resources and the new needs of a growing and
> dispersive movement which really needs a new approach.
>
> In the IC meeting in Belem in 2009, you and others drafted a document
> (which I am attaching) exactly in this direction, which Chico read in
> plenary.  I supported it then and still advocate for it now.
>
> For things to change and take a leap forward we need to make a special
> effort.  This has nothing to do with the budget (at least until we
> start working concretely on the single tasks).  I don't like
> bureaucratic approaches, but I do think that defining the terms of
> reference of the wsf office (as well as reviewing those of the
> commissions, an exercise that took years...) is a necessary step.
> Here we have a very specific task to do and we all agree it is urgent
> since the existing "institutional" website is old, difficult to manage
> and limited.  It was budgeted last year as part of the office's
> expenses, but it did not move on (I don't want to discuss
> responsibilities and certainly there have been other priorities and
> urgent matter - just citing a fact).  The first version of the
> participants database is online since January 2010, based on the USSF
> one, but it needs to be tested, adapted, adjusted, filled in, etc.
>
> As for the group I was suggesting, it is not at all a replica of the
> Liason (which has quite a different role), but at least it would put
> some names and require that each IC commission participate to the
> construction of the portal and the requirements of a database which
> could be used also by wsf organising committees (I'm thinking for
> instance of the wsf2007 nairobi database which we hope to be able to
> use to promote wsf2011). Then it is up to all of us to make it work.
>
> So... let's continue and enlarge this discussion!  And try to make it
> as concrete as possible as well...
>
> Cheers,
> Jason
>
>
>
>
> 2010/9/22 salete valesan <salete.valesan@...>:
>> Olá Jason,
>>
>> Podemos fazer um chat nesta ou na próxima semana. Porém, acredito que o
>> Nicolas não tem mais tempo de esperar a ComCom para fechar o projeto de
>> captação. Temos urgencia no projeto e nos recursos, em especial para o
>> escritório e para Dakar.
>>
>> Sobre o itens que você coloca, foram justamente eles que nos fizeram
>> encaminhar a idéia de um Seminário Internacional sobre a Comunicação do
>> FSM. É nesse espaço que vamos discutir a política e a concepção de
>> Comunicação "necessária e urgente" para o processo e eventos do FSM.
>>
>> Chat: posso dia 23 (14h), dia 24 (11h), 27 (9h), 28 (14H)
>> hora de Brasil
>>
>> bj
>> Salete
>>
>> 2010/9/21 Escritorio FSM - Helio <escritorio@...>
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> Just trying to contribute on clarifying some issues specifically related
>>> to the WSF office, pointed out in Jason's message:
>>>
>>> The discussion on the scope of the wsf office, and its task regarding all
>>> the commissions, have been discussed several times in the IC - the only
>>> instance having the legitimacy to define these questions. Of course, if it
>>> is still needed to rediscuss this issue, so let's make it   
>>> collectively, i.e,
>>> inside the IC, and not only in this or that space. I do think this is not a
>>> question related to the comcom budget construction process, but to  
>>>  the whole
>>> WSF/IC process itself.
>>>
>>> In this sense, and taking into account what have been discussed and
>>> decided within the IC framework, the wsf office is responsable of some
>>> "communicational" tasks, as managing and keeping the general website and
>>> databases. These tasks, although with a clear communicational   
>>> dimension, are
>>> not only related to communication purposes: they are related to and serve
>>> the whole process. I see no reason why make questions or doubts on this
>>> issue only before the construction of the budget...
>>>
>>> As all of we know, the office have been fulfilling a role as "reference
>>> point" of the process, and this is the main reason why, not only   
>>> in my point
>>> of view, but also in the IC deliberations in this sense, this   
>>> space takes in
>>> charge some responsabilities related not only to one or another commission,
>>> but to a, lets say, "general" interest of the process. These
>>> responsabilities are, of course, constructed in a shared and collaborative
>>> way with all people involved, and its a specific task of the Liaison Group
>>> to follow-up its developments.
>>>
>>> It was decided in the IC (first in Montreal, but reinforced in all
>>> subsequent meetings) that the wsf office was responsible of developing the
>>> wsf portal, as it is an interest of the process. As it has a clear
>>> communicational dimension (but also a strategic and methodological ones,
>>> related to expansion purposes too, for example), the building of the portal
>>> would be done in a collaborative way with ALL IC commissions and people
>>> involved. Of course this task will be a participatory one. From the office,
>>> its unthinkable to build all this only by the hands of the three people who
>>> compose its team - its not only polically and technically, but humanly and
>>> psychologically impossible! So, in very frank and sincere words, I reaaly
>>> see no reason of feraing this would be taken as just an operational task -
>>> because its not.
>>>
>>> Also, I really have a very big difficult on defining which is "political"
>>> or not in the WSF process framework - it seems to me that the consideration
>>> of what is "political" or not depends always on the approach chosen.
>>> Regarding this item (wsf portal), every part is "political" and "technical"
>>> at the same time - because "technical" is also "political" when it involves
>>> different points of view and a international scale as the WSF one is.
>>>
>>> Therefore, I really see no difficult on saying where the budget allocation
>>> should go (concerning these two points), as this definition have already
>>> been signaled by the IC. If these are "process items", having clearly but
>>> not exclusively a communicational dimension, this part of the budget should
>>> be allocated under the "process" line, i.e the wsf office one. Again, the
>>> task of following up the tasks takne under this "line", which are related
>>> not to one or another commission, is a task of the Liaison Group. Lets try
>>> to avoid creating more and more groups to taking specific and ad hoc
>>> responsabilities, instead of letting the already existing groups to fulfill
>>> its role, which wore collectivelly discussed and defined.
>>>
>>> All the best wishes,
>>> --
>>> Hélio Menezes
>>> Escritório do FSM / WSF Office
>>> São Paulo/SP - Brasil
>>> Tel.: +55 11 3258-8914
>>> www.forumsocialmundial.org.br
>>>
>>>
>>> 2010/9/21 Jason Nardi <jason.nardi@...>
>>>>
>>>> Querida Salete y tod@s,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for indicating some key points (I was hoping they would emerge)
>>>> in the budget proposal.
>>>>
>>>> I think we need to discuss further in order to take a good - and
>>>> shared - decision.
>>>>
>>>> Can we have one last online meeting on this, during this week?
>>>> Salete, please suggest a date and time.
>>>>
>>>> I think we need to address the following:
>>>>
>>>> 1. The scope of the WSF office and its specific tasks with regards to
>>>> communication -- and where these become strategic or political
>>>> decisions which are the IC's and the Communication's commission's
>>>> responsibility.
>>>>
>>>> Until we resolve this, it is difficult to say where the budget
>>>> allocation should go.  In this specific instance, I think it is the
>>>> WSF Office's responsibility to manage and keep the website and
>>>> database updated (stimulating contributions from and allowing access
>>>> to the IC and wsf organising committees), but not to create/develop
>>>> them - which is more a "political" responsibility involving the
>>>> Communication commission of the IC in particular, especially since we
>>>> agreed that we need to work to have the tools and websites developed
>>>> so far "converge" towards a common portal (so we need to design and
>>>> work on this together).  I personally have been proposing this for a
>>>> long time, but the collaborative efforts have been very low and
>>>> frankly, I fear that instead of a participatory process it might be
>>>> taken as just an operational task, which it is not.
>>>>
>>>> So my proposal is that we set a "project budget" for the website(s)
>>>> and database, dedicated to the technical development, convergence and
>>>> maintenance of the wsf portal, which could be under the responsibility
>>>> of a new group to be formed in the IC comprising people from the
>>>> various commissions who should have input on what kind of
>>>> functionalities the renewed website should have.  This could solve a
>>>> problem of "dispersion" and multiplication of websites, of methodology
>>>> (registration of participants) and strategy (promotion of the debate)
>>>> as well as how to better make the expansion (languages, ways to
>>>> involve different movements) and the resources (online fundraising).
>>>> And someone from the wsfoffice to help with their experience of
>>>> day-to-day management as well as from communication, with all the
>>>> accumulated working groups experience.
>>>>
>>>> This inter-commission group would then decide how to allocate the
>>>> funds after agreeing on the main features requested.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2. About Ciranda. It is not simply a matter of making equal divisions,
>>>> otherwise we would have to divide this budget into small insignificant
>>>> parts that won't allow us to do anything at all.  That said, I
>>>> certainly agree that Ciranda is not just a historical but an important
>>>> part of the wsf process and so is the radio forum and the other
>>>> initiatives that have been put forth.
>>>>
>>>> The proposal from Ciranda sets some important challenges. I think it
>>>> would be very useful if we could discuss these further - in particular
>>>> when it says (from Rita's message):
>>>>
>>>> "We perceive two demands from the Communication Commission in relation
>>>> to alternative media: interconnection between initiatives that produce
>>>> coverage of the WSF and the possibility of access to journalists who
>>>> have already participated in the WSF."
>>>>
>>>> These are not two new demands: they have been the reason by which we
>>>> all decided that a facilitation of alternative media in the wsf
>>>> process was needed. So what has Ciranda been doing until now?  I am
>>>> not saying this in a polemic way -- I support Ciranda since the
>>>> beginning! And I don't want to upset anyone.  But I do think that from
>>>> the discussions had in the IC in Mexico and before, there is still
>>>> some ambiguity on whether Ciranda is a space of the wsf process or an
>>>> independent media itself. There is a difference and it could be
>>>> difficult to continue to justify why Ciranda should receive economic
>>>> support from the Commission's budget and not Terra Viva or other
>>>> historical initiatives that have covered the forums all these years.
>>>> Since I do think Ciranda has made significant efforts, I would like
>>>> this issue to be solved once and for all !
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3. An occasion could be the public seminar on communication of the wsf
>>>> in Dakar.  It was proposed by Rita in Mexico but it hasn't been
>>>> discussed after that at all.  If we want to do this as a contribution
>>>> of the Communication commission, we need to decide it now and discuss
>>>> how to approach it, who will organise it, what is needed, how to
>>>> promote it, etc.  It would probably be more efficient if done together
>>>> with the African communication commission - but someone has to
>>>> initiate the debate!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 4. Addressing Judith's request about interpreters at IC meetings -
>>>> please Nicolas, correct me if I'm wrong.  That is the responsibility
>>>> of the local organising committee who hosts the meeting and is part of
>>>> a separate budget.  I agree it should be a fixed cost - but it's not
>>>> in the Comcom's scope.  Maybe the liason group should discuss this?
>>>>
>>>> I hope we can advance on all these issues, which are fundamental for
>>>> our present and future work.
>>>>
>>>> In solidarity,
>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2010/9/16 salete valesan <salete.valesan@...>:
>>>> > Queridos/as da ComCom,
>>>> >
>>>> > Olhei os arquivos do openfsm.net e tenho as seguintes considerações:
>>>> > 1 - Tirar os dois valores que são do escritório (Banco de dados e Site
>>>> > processo)  e colocar no orçamento próprio, enviado para o
>>>> > Ibase/oficina/Brasil.
>>>> >
>>>> > 2 - Separar o valor que está como Rádio e Ciranda pois são dois
>>>> > projetos
>>>> > diferentes de Comunicação Compartilhada (10.000 para cada um deles para
>>>> > ficar igual aos outros). A menos que a Pia e Rita estejam concordando
>>>> > que
>>>> > fiquem juntos.
>>>> > Os projetos de Comunicação Compartilhada (Ciranda, rádio e TV) tem como
>>>> > objetivo o processo e a cobertura dos eventos, por isso, precisa ver o
>>>> > que
>>>> > será possível garantir pela ComCom.
>>>> >
>>>> > 3 - Sobre a participação da ComCom com um Seminário em Dakar terá algum
>>>> > recurso?
>>>> > Nicolas, é possível colocar no orçamento do projeto do evento do
>>>> > FSM2011 de
>>>> > Dakar?
>>>> >
>>>> > 4 - Sobre Memória: estamos conversando aqui no Brasil com algumas
>>>> > pessoas do
>>>> > governo e de empresas estatais para ver se é possível fazer um projeto.
>>>> > Se
>>>> > tivermos alguma novidade boa, avisamos.
>>>> >
>>>> > 5 - Sobre a participação dos Brasileiros em Dakar, para o FSM 2011:
>>>> > ainda
>>>> > não nos organizamos pois o Brasil está em período de eleições até final
>>>> > de
>>>> > outrubro de 2010.
>>>> >
>>>> > Bj
>>>> > Salete
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 2010/9/15 <hitchman@...>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Dear all
>>>> >>
>>>> >> In terms of interpreting, please try to include Babel's participation
>>>> >> in
>>>> >> meetings, as well as the booths for interpretation and a per
>>>> >> diem/hotel
>>>> >> accommodation for interpreters (depending on the IC venue, local teams
>>>> >> can
>>>> >> cover this work). It should cover 7 people: 6 in the booths + 1 at the
>>>> >> table...
>>>> >>
>>>> >> As always, this is a variable cost, so I have no idea how to budget
>>>> >> it.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> In solidarity
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Judith
>>>> >> ---- Envoyé avec BlackBerry® d'Orange ----
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>>> >> From: Jason Nardi <jason.nardi@...>
>>>> >> Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 01:19:16
>>>> >> To: wsf com com<communication-commission-discussion@...>
>>>> >> Reply-To: communication-commission-discussion@...
>>>> >> Subject: [Communication commission discussion] Commission's budget
>>>> >> proposal
>>>> >>        2011-2012 - deadline this week!
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Dear all,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> since after the last online meeting (september 6th) only a few
>>>> >> exchanges have taken place, I want to remind all who are interested
>>>> >> and active in the working groups to contribute with ideas and
>>>> >> proposals by next Friday 17th, which is the extension we were granted.
>>>> >>  Nicolas and the Resources commission need to put all the commissions'
>>>> >> basic budget proposals together in a general "wsf process" one for
>>>> >> 2011-2012.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I have posted in the Resources part of the Com com space on
>>>> >> openfsm.net what I think could be a first version, based on the past
>>>> >> experiences and with all the limitations of having to deal with a
>>>> >> lower amount of expected resources.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> So please have a look and comment / integrate:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> http://openfsm.net/projects/communication-commission/comcomfunding-wiki
>>>> >>
>>>> >> cheers,
>>>> >> Jason
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> [ESP]
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Hola a todos,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> ya que después de la reunión en línea pasado (06 de septiembre), sólo
>>>> >> unos pocos intercambios han tenido lugar, quiero recordar a todos los
>>>> >> que estén interesados y activos en los grupos de trabajo para
>>>> >> contribuir con ideas y propuestas para el viernes 17 sept., que es la
>>>> >> extensión que se les concedió. Nicolás y la Comisión de Recursos
>>>> >> necesidad de poner todas las propuestas de las comisiones en una
>>>> >> general del "proceso del FSM" para 2011-2012.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> He publicado en la parte de recursos del espacio com Com en
>>>> >> openfsm.net, lo que creo que podría ser una primera versión, basada en
>>>> >> las experiencias del pasado y con todas las limitaciones de tener que
>>>> >> lidiar con una menor cantidad de recursos previsto.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Así que por favor eche un vistazo y comentario / integracion:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> http://openfsm.net/projects/communication-commission/comcomfunding-wiki
>>>> >>
>>>> >> saludos,
>>>> >> Jason
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> Archive:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>   
>>>> http://openfsm.net/projects/communication-commission/lists/communication-commission-discussion/archive/2010/09/1284593045783
>>>> >> To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to
>>>> >> communication-commission-discussion@....  Please contact
>>>> >> communication-commission-discussion-manager@... for
>>>> >> questions.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> Archive:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>   
>>>> http://openfsm.net/projects/communication-commission/lists/communication-commission-discussion/archive/2010/09/1284605669468
>>>> >> To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to
>>>> >> communication-commission-discussion@....  Please contact
>>>> >> communication-commission-discussion-manager@... for
>>>> >> questions.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1284647022368
>>>> > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to
>>>> > communication-commission-discussion@.... Please contact
>>>> > communication-commission-discussion-manager@... for
>>>> > questions.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Archive:
>>>> http://openfsm.net/projects/communication-commission/lists/communication-commission-discussion/archive/2010/09/1285059291542
>>>> To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to
>>>> communication-commission-discussion@....  Please contact
>>>> communication-commission-discussion-manager@... for  
>>>>  questions.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1285087306255
>>> To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to
>>> communication-commission-discussion@.... Please contact
>>> communication-commission-discussion-manager@... for   
>>> questions.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Archive: http://openfsm.net/[…]/1285117252844
>> To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to
>> communication-commission-discussion@.... Please contact
>> communication-commission-discussion-manager@... for questions.
>>
>
>
> --
> Archive:   
> http://openfsm.net/projects/communication-commission/lists/communication-commission-discussion/archive/2010/09/1285144721945
> To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to   
> communication-commission-discussion@....  Please   
> contact   
> communication-commission-discussion-manager@... for   
> questions.
>