Adam,
It is very true that we have not been precise on this point and that the
second sentence should have been "the 31 organisations", but as Bruce
suggests, I believe we should not emphasise this mistake more than that. If
the people from Japan do notice this, then we definitely should write an
officila letter of excuse, but otherwise I am not sure.
Sacha or whosoever sends the letter to the japanses organisers, has been
done already? If not, it should be done as soon as possible,but it would be
perfect to change this mistake, so that means to replace:
-"Beginning with the issues raised and seeking to positively contribute to
the Asian Regional Conference and to the WSIS process at the global level,
the 34 organisations have come to a consensus on the following vision,
principles and plan of action."
by
- "Beginning with the issues raised and seeking to positively contribute to
the Asian Regional Conference and to the WSIS process at the global level,
31 organisations have come to a consensus on the following vision,
principles and plan of action"
best regards,
Chantal
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Girard" <bgirard@comunica.org>
To: <communication@wsisasia.org>
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 6:19 PM
Subject: [communication 108] Re: Bangkok Rpt. Participants include ITU,
UNESCO - were they part of our consensus?
> Adam,
>
> Has this posed a problem that you are aware of?
>
> If not, it doesn't seem to me a good idea to bring attention to a possible
mistake that
> nobody has noticed. The question can also be asked whether Glocom agreed
to the
> document (do you have authority to do this?) or even whether CRIS did (do
I have
> authority?).
>
> bg
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, 10 December, 2002 at 2:06, Adam Peake wrote:
>
> > I hope this question is just being picky or my mistake:
> >
> > In our report and declaration, we used the words:
> >
> > "with representatives of 34 organisations from 16 different countries"
> >
> > and
> >
> > "the 34 participants have come to a consensus on the following
> > vision, principles and plan of action."
> >
> > But, in the List of Participants we include the E-Asian WG, ITU and
> > UNESCO, and looks like they make up 3 of the 34 participants. Also the
> > Korean Professor, Kim Kio Chung.
> >
> > Did they agree on our document... If not, perhaps a clarification
> > letter to Mr Asami is required, quickly? (we apologize for the
> > implication that the representatives of these three organizations
> > endorsed the document. They kindly spoke at the workshop and so were
> > included in the list of participants. We did not intend to imply that
> > they later supported the output of the workshop. We sincerely
> > apologize for any misunderstanding. Please accept this edited report
> > ?????)
> >
> > And send a new document.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Adam
> > --
> >
> >
>