2010/9/22 salete valesan <salete.valesan@gmail.com>

Ol� Jason,

�

Podemos fazer um chat nesta ou na pr�xima semana. Por�m, acredito que o Nicolas n�o tem mais tempo de�esperar a ComCom para fechar o projeto de capta��o. Temos urgencia no projeto e nos recursos, em especial para o escrit�rio e para Dakar.

�

Sobre o itens que voc� coloca, foram justamente eles que nos fizeram encaminhar�a id�ia de um Semin�rio Internacional sobre a Comunica��o do FSM.�� nesse espa�o que vamos discutir a pol�tica e a concep��o de Comunica��o "necess�ria 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@forumsocialmundial.org.br>

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,
--

H�lio Menezes
Escrit�rio do FSM / WSF Office
S�o Paulo/SP - Brasil
Tel.: +55 11 3258-8914

www.forumsocialmundial.org.br

2010/9/21 Jason Nardi <jason.nardi@gmail.com>

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@gmail.com>:

> Queridos/as da ComCom,
>
> Olhei os arquivos do openfsm.net�e tenho as seguintes considera��es:
> 1 - Tirar os dois valores que s�o do escrit�rio (Banco de dados e Site
> processo)��e colocar no or�amento�pr�prio, enviado para o
> Ibase/oficina/Brasil.
>
> 2 - Separar o valor que est� como R�dio e Ciranda pois s�o dois projetos
> diferentes de Comunica��o 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 Comunica��o Compartilhada (Ciranda, r�dio e TV)�tem como
> objetivo o processo e a cobertura dos eventos, por isso, precisa ver o que
> ser� poss�vel garantir pela ComCom.
>
> 3 - Sobre a participa��o da ComCom com um Semin�rio em Dakar ter� algum
> recurso?
> Nicolas,�� poss�vel colocar no or�amento do projeto do evento do FSM2011 de
> Dakar?
>
> 4 - Sobre Mem�ria: estamos conversando aqui no Brasil com algumas pessoas do
> governo e de empresas estatais para ver se � poss�vel fazer um projeto. Se
> tivermos alguma novidade boa, avisamos.
>
> 5 - Sobre a participa��o dos Brasileiros em Dakar, para o FSM 2011: ainda
> n�o nos organizamos pois o Brasil est� em per�odo de elei��es at� final de
> outrubro de 2010.
>
> Bj
> Salete
>
>
>
> 2010/9/15 <hitchman@club-internet.fr>
>>
>> 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
>> ---- Envoy� avec BlackBerry� d'Orange ----
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jason Nardi <jason.nardi@gmail.com>
>> Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 01:19:16
>> To: wsf com com<communication-commission-discussion@lists.openfsm.net>
>> Reply-To: communication-commission-discussion@lists.openfsm.net
>> 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 despu�s de la reuni�n en l�nea pasado (06 de septiembre), s�lo
>> unos pocos intercambios han tenido lugar, quiero recordar a todos los
>> que est�n interesados y activos en los grupos de trabajo para
>> contribuir con ideas y propuestas para el viernes 17 sept., que es la
>> extensi�n que se les concedi�. Nicol�s y la Comisi�n 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 podr�a ser una primera versi�n, basada en
>> las experiencias del pasado y con todas las limitaciones de tener que
>> lidiar con una menor cantidad de recursos previsto.
>>
>> As� 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@lists.openfsm.net. �Please contact
>> communication-commission-discussion-manager@lists.openfsm.net 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@lists.openfsm.net. �Please contact
>> communication-commission-discussion-manager@lists.openfsm.net for questions.
>
>
>
> --
> Archive: http://openfsm.net/[�]/1284647022368
> To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to
> communication-commission-discussion@lists.openfsm.net. Please contact
> communication-commission-discussion-manager@lists.openfsm.net 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@lists.openfsm.net. �Please contact communication-commission-discussion-manager@lists.openfsm.net for questions.

--
Archive: http://openfsm.net/[�]/1285087306255

To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to communication-commission-discussion@lists.openfsm.net. Please contact communication-commission-discussion-manager@lists.openfsm.net for questions.

--
Archive: http://openfsm.net/[�]/1285117252844

To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to communication-commission-discussion@lists.openfsm.net. Please contact communication-commission-discussion-manager@lists.openfsm.net for questions.