[DC3] RES: RES: Re: Future IGF Dynamic Coalition on Connected Communities

I tend to agree with Nico. It is indeed the action plan that will define what this coalition will do rather than the acronym we choose. Parminder, your point is clear but it seems to me that all other participants would agree with the name DC on Conncected Communities, while clearly explaining our focus within the action plan. If you can live with the proposed name, I would ask everyone to check the action plan to propose final tweaks and modifications, so that I can send the request yo the IGF Secretariat by the end of the week. Here is the pad https://public.etherpad-mozilla.org/p/dc_on_connected_communities Best Luca ________________________________________ De: dc3-bounces(a)listas.altermundi.net [dc3-bounces(a)listas.altermundi.net] em nome de Nicolás Echániz [nicoechaniz(a)altermundi.net] Enviado: quinta-feira, 19 de novembro de 2015 13:26 Para: dc3(a)listas.altermundi.net Assunto: Re: [DC3] RES: Re: Future IGF Dynamic Coalition on Connected Communities Parminder, I get your point and it's an important one. Maybe: Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity would be better? (and we can keep the DC3 acronym) At first we talked about calling it Dynamic Coalition on Community Networks, but this poses the problem of maybe being too narrow. Some interesting solutions for community connectivity are not exactly community networks but we still share most of our needs and goals regarding policy, etc. so a broader name was necessary. I'd like to propose that we close this discussion soon, not because it is not interesting, but because I've seen many community networks coalition attempts get entangled in the naming discussion for weeks, and get to no solution that would satisfy everyone. Let's make this Coalition be defined by the work we do, regardless of the name we end up choosing. Cheers, Nico