The WGIG is not a group which depends from the ITU, but directly from the UN general-secretary The first WGIG meeting dealt with the selection process and the possible composition of the WGIG bureau. the possible composition of the WGIG bureau. Currently, there are several opinions among the states. A major western entity advocates 1/2 governments 1/4 Private 1/4 CS while some other countries advocate 1/3 1/3 1/3 Therefore one expect that the number of CS representatives would vary between 5 and 7. The duty would consist in about 3 to 4 meetings lasting each one about 4 days or a week, between November and June 2005. Of course, being at meetings is only part of the task. Each member is to study reports and write them. Each member is expected to contribute in writing the final report of the WGIG. So this would be a pretty heavy workload. We tentavily suggested that the Civil Society, because of its own specific constraints, should be able to designate a member with his/her alternate/backup to ensure a reliable and inclusive representation of the Civil Society. This suggestion has been well received, but everything concerning WGIG will be decided at the Consultations on the establishment of the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) which will be held in Geneva on 20/21 September 2004. After this meeting, a tentative list of WGIG proposed members will be sent in New York, to the UN general-secretary that may choose CS representative in this list or outside the list.

The Civil Society Working Group on Internet Gouvernance after lively debates decided to make a formal call ( 07 September 2004 ) to all Thematic Working Groups in order to compose a list of representatives with their inputs :

To Members of WSIS Civil Society, Caucuses and Working Groups

The WSIS Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus hopes to assemble a 
list of candidates for membership in the Working Group on Internet 
Governance (WGIG).  The purpose of the list is to give Mr. Kummer and 
Mr. Annan a set of candidates from which they can select members for 
the WGIG. This list will not be the only input into the membership 
decision process, and does not prevent any group or individual from 
submitting her or his recommendations. We wish to provide the 
collective recommendations of WSIS caucuses and working groups.

After much deliberation on the process by which the candidate list 
would be compiled, we, as coordinators of the Internet Governance 
caucus have made the decision to invite each of the WSIS civil 
society caucuses and working groups to suggest between one (1) and 
three (3) names for inclusion on the candidate list.

There is not agreement for this course of action among members of the 
IG Caucus, but time is pressing and we feel WSIS Civil Society must 
have an opportunity to participate in this process.  This can work if 
we all try to make it work.  It means trying to think what is best 
for civil society, and not any particular interest group.  Please 
read this note carefully. And refer to the draft statement on 
structure of the WGIG you can find at this URL 
http://www.too-much.tv/internet_governance
(Spanish, French,English and Portuguese.)

One of the goals for this candidate list is to make sure that all of 
the topical areas that might be included in the governance debate are 
covered. Indications are that the WGIG will take a broad view of 
Internet governance, and issues will include ICANN, Spam, information 
and network security, privacy and other ICT rights issues, 
intellectual property rights, and interconnection agreements to name 
just a few. Asking the other caucuses and working groups for 
recommendations is considered the best way to make sure that all 
topics of concern to WSIS civil society are present.

Note that our recommendations about the structure of the WGIG  (here 
http://www.too-much.tv/internet_governance )
say we think the group 
should be small, between 19 and 31 total core members. By asking for 
nominations from all of WSIS civil society we are inviting a 
potentially large number of names to be submitted. Some means of 
reducing the composite list we receive may be required. We look 
forward to your advice on how we might handle this situation, it is 
quite likely. We suggest discussions about this are started now on 
the CS plenary list.

Please attempt to prioritize your nominations. If you are unable to 
do so please state clearly that your list is not prioritized. 
Coordination of nominations among caucuses/working group will be very 
helpful.

Individual members of the CS plenary may also submit nominations. 
Individuals should submit their nominations based on the criteria 
explained below.

As background for making the caucus/working group decision on the 
candidates, a draft of the WSIS Civil Society caucus's contribution 
on the WGIG can be found online at 
http://www.too-much.tv/internet_governance 
These notes discuss some of the contents of the contribution.

We consider it critical that a balanced WGIG be drawn from a multi 
dimensional consideration of diversity.  That is, diversity in terms 
of sector, region, gender, and language background, among others, 
must be considered in assembling the WGIG.  It is also important that 
there be a balance between members from developing and developed 
countries.  It is also considered very important that candidates have 
a degree of knowledge of the issues, including policy, legal and 
technical, involved in the Internet governance debate. We also 
suggest candidates should have experience working in an international 
committee environment, be aware of ICT for development issues and 
human rights. No candidate is expected to have all these qualities, 
but we are suggesting they should be people with broad experience.

It is considered critical that though all participants come from 
different perspectives, they should be people who are willing to 
listen and consider carefully the views of others.  It is expected 
that the best outcome for the WGIG will come from an assembly of open 
minded individuals who can share their knowledge and expertise in an 
cooperative manner.

Finally it is considered important that any individual nominated as a 
candidate understand the amount of work this assignment would involve 
and indicate a readiness to participate.  While the work plan of the 
WGIG has yet to be determined, it is expected that the WGIG will 
begin work in the final months of 2004 and finish by July 2005. The 
schedule will most probably involve, email discussions, 
teleconferences and up to four (4) face to face meetings.  We 
anticipate that the working language of the WGIG itself will be 
English. It is expected, however, that there will be a great 
sensitivity to language issues as the WGIG conducts its work and 
consultations.

In making your caucuses/working groups recommendation, we request 
that you submit the following information, which will be passed on to 
Mr. Kummer, with the names of the candidates:

- Reliable contact information for the candidate; i.e. email, 
telephone, fax and postal address.

- A statement indicating the qualities that the person would bring to 
the WGIG.  While no particular content is being required, it is 
recommended that this section include a discussion of the concerns 
mentioned above and a discussion of the experience and perspective 
the candidate would bring to the WGIG discussions.

- A statement of the person's governance related affiliations.  That 
is information such as: which sector does the person belong to 
(government, industry or civil society), what caucuses/working groups 
do they participate in, employer, national background, and language 
skills.

- An indication from the candidate that they understand the work load 
they are volunteering for and that they are available during the 
expected period of deliberations.

- A short statement about your caucus/working group. Include 
information about the group's background and history, membership 
(numbers), and achievements or other information you think relevant. 
Please give a URL for a website if you have one.

It is recommended that these statements be no more then two pages in 
length. Candidate information will be collated and published on the 
Internet http://www.too-much.tv/internet_governance/
 (with candidates personal contact information removed.)

Members of the Internet governance caucus will aggregate the names 
received and send them along with the name of the caucus/working 
groups that made the nomination to Markus Kummer.  If any 
reconsideration of names is required in light of issues arising from 
the WGIG consultation on September 20-21 we will hold any relevant 
discussions about this on the plenary mailing list.

Time is short on gathering the list of candidates and you are 
requested to submit the candidate statements within the next two 
weeks.  The deadline for submission of candidate statements is 20 
Sept, 2004.  All statements should be sent to:
[email protected]

In concluding, we thank you for helping us complete this important task.

Please try to coordinate your nominations with other caucuses and 
working groups.  And please consider the qualities your nominations 
will bring to the WGIG carefully. If you have questions about the 
process please contact the coordinators of the Caucus:

Jeanette Hofmann and Adam Peake
Coordinators, Internet Governance Caucus

Please follow the format described below and send to this address:
[email protected]

We will collate all nominations.

Please also send to the civil society plenary list if you wish, but 
suggest you strip any personal contact information before doing so.

The format below only asks for information about the caucus or 
working group submitting the nomination(s), we should also have 
something about any individual making a nomination: who you are, your 
relationship with the nominee (typical conflict of interest issues.) 
This will not be necessary for a self-nomination :-)

Format for submitting nomination(s)

In making your caucuses/working groups recommendation, we request 
that you submit the following information, which will be passed on to 
Mr. Kummer, with the names of the candidates. Individual members of 
the CS plenary may also submit nominations. Individuals should also 
submit their nominations based on the criteria explained below.

- Reliable contact information for the candidate; i.e. email, 
telephone, fax and postal address.

- A statement indicating the qualities that the person would bring to 
the WGIG.  While no particular content is being required, it is 
recommended that this section include a discussion of the concerns 
mentioned above and a discussion of the experience and perspective 
the candidate would bring to the WGIG discussions.

- A statement of the person's governance related affiliations.  That 
is information such as: which sector does the person belong to 
(government, industry or civil society), what caucuses/working groups 
do they participate in, employer, national background, and language 
skills.

- An indication from the candidate that they understand the work load 
they are volunteering for and that they are available during the 
expected period of deliberations.

- A short statement about your caucus/working group. Include 
information about the group's background and history, membership 
(numbers), and achievements or other information you think relevant. 
Please give a URL for a website if you have one.

It is recommended that these statements be no more then two pages in 
length. Candidate information will be collated and published on the 
Internet http://www.too-much.tv/internet_governance
 (with candidates personal contact information removed.)

According to reliable sources ( yet to be confirmed in writting ), travel expenses will be supported for people from developing countries, and on a case by case basis for people from other countries.

Dealine for comments on structure, methodology and scope of the consultation on the WGIG meeting
( September 20-21, Geneva ) : Monday 13th 


Names of CS candidates to the WGIG are not required before the meeting, 
they will of course be accepted and considered, but not required before. 
Markus Kummer expects that during the consultation meeting, discussions that will be held
to help the CS to recommend names. Therefore, the logical time to submit names is soon 
after the consultation meeting i.e on Sept 22.


The suggestion of the CS-IG group is for caucuses and WG to send names by Sept. 20. 
The CS-IG will collate names and share them with Markus Kummer. 
Then the CS may send a revised final list of names by Sept. 27.

 
If there are too many names, the  CS-IG group we will need to come back to plenary 
and discuss ways we can reduce the number


The CS-IG will, of course, inform plenary of their impressions of the consultation 
and any special consideration that might be given in making nominations. 

 A list of candidates, 9 recommendations for the 
  working group and a second slate of 8 
  "connectors" were sent to Markus Kummer yesterday.
  
  Slate of candidates for the WGIG itself:
  
  * Carlos Afonso (Brazil)
  * Karen Banks (Australia)
  * Vittorio Bertola (Italy)
  * Avri Doria (USA/Israel)
  * William Drake (USA)
  * Raul Echeberria, (Uruguay)
  * Wolfgang Kleinwachter (Germany)
  * Marlyn Tadros (Egypt)
  * Ang Peng Hwa (Singapore)
  
  Slate of "connectors":
  
  * Jonathan Cave (UK), Scientific Information WG
  * Georg Greve (Germany), Patents, Copyrights and 
  Trademarks WG
  * Gus Hosein (Canada), Privacy and Security WG
  * Joseph Sarr (Senegal), Cities and Local Authorities 
  Caucus
  * Robert Sagun (Philippines), Youth Caucus
  * Hiroshi Kawamura (Japan), Persons with Disabilities 
  Caucus
  * Aidan White (Ireland), Media Caucus
  * Jacqueline A. Morris (Trinidad and Tobago), Gender 
  Caucus
  
  Note that the African Caucus sent a list of names 
  separately to Markus Kummer, we did not know who 
  was on their list until late yesterday so were 
  unable to include their recommendations and did 
  not try to duplicate.
  
  The recommendations were sent to Markus Kummer 
  yesterday by Izumi Aizu.  Izumi's emails to Mr. 
  Kummer copied below.
  
  Thank you,
  
  Adam
  
  
  Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 18:35:37 +0900
  To: Markus KUMMER 
  From: Izumi Aizu 
  
  Dear Markus,
  
  Here attached is the Civil Society Plenary's slate of 
  people for the
  Members of the Working Group on Internet Governance.
  
  This selection is done through extensive online process 
  and also some off-line
  discussions among all the caucus and family 
  members of the Civil Society Plenary
  of the WSIS.
  
  We have setup a website for all the candidates 
  recommended from  different Caucuses and Working Group/Families:
  http://www.net-gov.org/wgig/
  
  The final selection was carried out by small number of 
  volunteers acted as
  "NomCom", facilitated by the two co-coordinators of the 
  Internet Governance  Caucus, Jeanette Hofmann and Adam Peake, 
  though Jeanette did not directly
  participate the nomination/selection, but remained as 
  more of procedural and  logistical coordinator. 
  All NomCom members were, by default, excluded from
  the selection.
  
  NomCom members include:
  
  Bertrand de LA CHAPELLE 
  Adam Peake 
  Renata Bloem 
  Valeria 
  Izumi Aizu  
  

After the first round of consultations in Geneva on 
September 20-21, the size, composition and mandate of the 
WGIG remain in discussion. This makes the selection of 
potential members from civil society a delicate issue that 
the Internet Governance Caucus wanted to address in the most 
transparent and inclusive manner. 

In its contribution to the September Consultations, the 
IG Caucus indicated its recommendations for the WGIG :

- a limited size (20-30 members) 
- a facilitating role for a larger group of stakeholders 
rather than a high level decision-making group
- a fully balanced composition (1/3 governments, 1/3 private 
sector, 1/3 civil society) 

The IG Caucus therefore decided to designate a slate of 
about 10 people, aiming as much as possible for a 
geographical, gender, age and profile balance. 

The Internet Governance Caucus also considered that although 
the origin of the WGIG creation was to address principally 
the Domain Name System and ICANN, it will progressively 
cover a broader definition of Internet Governance and 
will need to expand its competence pool accordingly. 

Finally, the main purpose of the WGIG should be to 
facilitate an iterative consultation and drafting process 
within the larger group of concerned stakeholders, via both 
physical meetings and online consultations. 

In that context, the IG Caucus not only determined a list of 
nominees for itself but also invited other regional and 
thematic civil society caucuses to identify potential 
candidates to be taken into consideration. This dual and 
bottom-up process process produced a list of 35 nominees 
and the profiles of nominees wer publicly posted on 
http://www.net-gov.org/wgig/

At the initiative of one of the Caucus co-coordinators, a 
small NomCom was formed to review the list of nominees and 
facilitate identification of an appropriately balanced slate 
to be transmitted to the Secretary General.

This process was not easy and resulted in two complementary 
sets of names.

First, a  limited slate of candidates for the WGIG itself :

- Carlos Afonso (Brazil), Technical Development Director, RITS
- Karen Banks, (Australia), Association  for Progressive 
communications
- Vittorio Bertola (Italy), Chair, ICANN At Large Advisory 
Committee
- Avri Doria, (USA), Lulea University, Sweden
- William Drake (USA), President, Computer Professionals for 
Social Responsibility
- Raul Echeberria, (Uruguay), LACNIC CEO
- Wolfgang Kleinwachter (Germany), Professor for 
International Communication Policy and Regulation, 
University of Aarhus, 
Denmark
- Marlyn Tadros, (Egypt), Executive Director, Virtual 
Activism
- Ang Peng Hwa, (Singapore), Dean of School of Communication 
& Information, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 


Second, based on the submissions from other Civil Society 
thematic caucuses, a list of "connectors" has been 
established to facilitate interaction with various thematic 
constituencies as the process expands to a broader range of 
issues :

- Jonathan Cave (UK), Professor, Warwick University (corrected, not the RAND Europe)  
connector for the Scientific Information Working Group
- Georg Greve (Germany), President, Free Software 
Foundation Europe, connector for the Patents, Copyrights and 
Trademanrks WG;
- Gus Hosein (Canada), Fellow Information Systems, London 
Schoold of Economics and Senior Fellow, Privacy 
International; connector for Privacy and Security WG;
- Joseph Sarr (Senegal), President, NTIC Commission of the 
Dakar Regional Council; connector to the Cities and Local 
Authorities Caucus
- Robert Sagun (Philippines), Policy Coordinator of the WSIS 
Youth Caucus
- Hiroshi Kawamura (Japan), Japanese Society for the 
Rehabilitation of Persons with Disabilities (JSRPD), Daisy 
Consortium Board member; connector to the Persons with 
Disabilities caucus
- Aidan White (Ireland), General secretary of the 
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), connector for 
the Media caucus;
- Jacqueline A. Morris (Trinidad and Tobago), connector for 
the Gender Caucus.

(A full list of Civil Society caucuses and Working Groups is 
available at : http://www.wsis-cs.org/caucuses.html
 )

These connectors will follow closely the work of the WGIG 
and participate in its process to help ensure a good 
articulation between the different issues. Should the WGIG 
decide to create sub-groups on thematic issues, these 
connectors will also help mobilize the relevant actors.

This dual list intends to cover on the one hand the 
immediate nomination needs in the WGIG creation phase and, 
on the other hand, to anticipate its future activities. 
 
No list or suggestion can be perfect and the members of the 
NomCom tried their best to pay tribute to the broad range of 
competences available. We hope the above-mentionned lists - 
that will be sent to Markus Kummer for his meetings in New 
York tomorrow - will facilitate the full participation of 
civil society in the WGIG.  

The NomCom was composed of Adam Peake, Renate Bloem, Izumi 
Aizu, Valeria Betancourt and Bertrand de La Chapelle. 

-- Develop a working definition of Internet governance;

-- Identify the public policy issues that are relevant to Internet governance; and

-- Develop a common understanding of the respective roles and responsibilities of governments, international organizations and other forums, as well as the private sector and civil society from both developing and developed countries.

The WGIG includes 40 members from governments, private sector and civil society

The Working Group is not a negotiating forum

The first meeting of the Working Group is scheduled to take place in Geneva from 23 to 25 November.  On 24 November, the meeting will be held in an open format, allowing all governments and other stakeholders to interact with the Working Group.

Contact
New York, Edoardo Bellando, tel:(212) 963-8275, e-mail: [email protected]
Geneva, Markus Kummer, tel. +41 0 22 917 54 88, e-mail: [email protected]
Web sites: www.wgig.org and www.un-wgig.org.

List of Members ( see also Official List )

Chairman:Nitin Desai.

Members:

-- Abdullah Al-Darrab, Deputy Governor of Technical Affairs, ICT Commission of Saudi Arabia;

-- Carlos Alfonso, Technical Director, RIT, Rio de Janeiro;

-- Peng Hwa Ang, Dean, School of Communication, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore;

-- Karen Banks, Director, GreenNet, Association for Progressive Communications, London;

-- Faryel Beji, President and CEO, Tunisian Internet Agency;

-- Vittorio Bertola, ICANN at-large Advisory Committee, Turin;

-- Jose Alexandre Bicalho, Member, Brazilian Internet Steering Committee; Advisor, Board of Directors, National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel);

-- Kangsik Cheon, Chief Operating Officer, International Business Development, Netpia, Seoul;

-- Trevor Clarke, Permanent Representative of Barbados to the United Nations in Geneva;

-- Avri Doria, Technical Consultant, Providence, Rhode Island;

-- William Drake, Senior Associate, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, Geneva; Chairman, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility;

-- Raul Echeberria, Executive Director, LACNIC, Montevideo;

-- Dev Erriah, Chairman, ICT Authority of Mauritius;

-- Baher Esmat, Telecom Planning Manager, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, Egypt;

-- Mark Esseboom, Director, Strategy and International Affairs, Directorate General for Telecom and Post, Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Netherlands;

-- Juan Fernandez, Coordinator, Commission of Electronic Commerce, Cuba;

-- Ayesha Hassan, Senior Policy Manager for E-Business, IT and Telecoms, International Chamber of Commerce, Paris;

-- Qiheng Hu, Adviser, Science and Technology Commission, Ministry of Information Industry, China; former Vice-President, ChineseAcademy of Sciences;

-- Willy Jensen, Director, Norwegian Post and Telecom Authority;

-- Wolfgang Kleinwachter, Professor, International Communication Policy and Regulation, University of Aarhus;

-- Jovan Kurbalija, Director, DiploFoundation, Geneva;

-- Iosif Charles Legrand, Researcher, California Institute of Technology and CERN, Geneva;

-- Donald MacLean, Director, MacLean Consulting, Ottawa;

-- Allen Miller, Executive Director, World Information Technology and Services Alliance, Arlington, Virginia;

-- Juan Carlos Moreno Solines, Executive Director, Gobierno Digital, Quito;

-- Jacqueline A. Morris, Consultant, Port of Spain;

-- Olivier Nana Nzepa, Coordinator, Africa Civil Society, Yaoundé

-- Alejandro Pisanty, Director, Computing Academic Services, Universidad Autonoma de Mexico; ICANN board

-- Khalilullah Qazi, Permanent Mission of Pakistan to the United Nations in Geneva;

-- Rajashekar Ramaraj, Managing Director, Sify Limited, Chennai;

-- Masaaki Sakamaki, Director, Computer Communications Division, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan;

-- Joseph Sarr, President, NTIC Commission, Dakar Regional Council;

-- Peimann Seadat, Permanent Mission of Iran to the United Nations in Geneva;

-- Charles Shaban, IT Manager, Talal Abu- Ghazaleh International, Amman;

-- Lyndall Shope-Mafole, Chairperson, Presidential National Commission on Information Society and Development, South Africa;

-- Waudo Siganga, Chairman, Computer Society of Kenya;

-- Mikhail Vladimirovich Yakushev, Director, Legal Support Department, Ministry of Information Technology and Communications, Russian Federation;

-- Peter Zangl, Deputy Director-General, Information Society Directorate General, European Commission, Brussels; and

-- Jean-Paul Zens, Director, Media and Telecom Department, Ministry of State, Luxembourg.

                                           SUMMARY 

- Carlos Afonso (Brazil), (second LAC Caucus that split from
 the original LAC Caucus ), selected  
- Karen Banks, (Australia),IG group, selected 
- Vittorio Bertola (Italy), IG group selected
- Avri Doria, (USA),IG group selected
- William Drake (USA),IG group selected
- Raul Echeberria,  (Uruguay)  
( second LAC caucus that split from  the original LAC Caucus  ), selected
- Wolfgang Kleinwachter (Germany) IG group  , selected
- Marlyn Tadros, (Egypt) ( Arab caucus ), not accepted
- Ang Peng Hwa, (Singapore) selected 

- Jonathan Cave (UK), connector for the Scientific Information Working Group, not accepted
- Georg Greve (Germany), connector for the Patents, Copyrights and Trademanrks WG, not accepted
- Gus Hosein (Canada), connector for Privacy and Security WG, not accepted
- Joseph Sarr (Senegal), connector to the Cities and Local Authorities Caucus, selected
- Robert Sagun (Philippines),  WSIS Youth Caucus, not accepted
- Hiroshi Kawamura (Japan), connector to the Persons with Disabilities caucus, not accepted
- Aidan White (Ireland),  connector for the Media caucus, not accepted
- Jacqueline A. Morris (Trinidad and Tobago), connector for the Gender Caucus, selected

All candidates from the IG group were accepted. Only one candidate proposed by the IG group to become a WGIG member was rejected. Two persons listed as "connectors" were unexpectedly selected.

Later on, people that have been selected as "connectors" began to wonder if this position corresponds to any special status in regards to the WGIG. The concept of "connector" has not been discussed beforehand within the Civil Society,, and came as a complete surprise to everybody. A disapointed "connector" asked Kummer for clarification. Kummer's answer was : As you may be aware, it is our intention to create a process that is as open as possible. In order to achieve this objective, we will have to respect some ground rules. One of them is that the closed meeting are closed to non-members of the WGIG. Opening up these meetings to some would be opening Pandora's box and would lead to pressures from representatives from Governments (more than 170 of them are not represented in the group) as well as other stakeholders. As you know, civil society is very well represented in the group and your are encouraged to work with and through the civil society members.
Of course at any time you can submit your own contributions - we will post them on our website. In any case, all future meetings will be accompanied by an open round of consultations. The connector then replied to Kummer who did not offer further comments : Thanks for your email and the clarification it contains. I believe it does answer my questions, if I have understood correctly that connectors have the same role as other members of the public.

Therefore, the "connector" position is a non-existent notion concerning official relationships with the WGIG. It seems at best a position that may have a relative existence within the Civil Society. However, since the list of "Connectors" has been announced , and until now (mid-January 2005) neither the Internet Gouvernance Caucus, neither the CS members of the WGIG has made any formal call to the "connectors" and their "connected" working groups for input. "as the process expands to a broader range of issues.". Patents and Copyrights issues are now ( and not surprisingly, because this is unavoidable ) clearly on the agenda, since Vittorio Bertola posted "I am the "lead drafter" on intellectual property (and on privacy too)".

No discussions (at least up to January, 22, 2005) on the substance of the questions that are being currently debated by the WGIG, are being held in the Internet Gouvernance (IG) working group, illustrating a lack of connection between the IG group and the members of the WGIG that are coming from the very IG group. If WGIG confidentiality rules are such that drafts cannot be circulated outside of the WGIG in this first phase, they do not prevent to held debates concerning the problems that are at stake. Neither the WGIG or the IG group have contacted the "connectors" and the thematics groups to get input on content issues.