The reappointment of the Advisory Group has just been announced (though this is not yet reflected on the IGF's own Web site). You may have missed the open call for volunteers for appointment to the Advisory Group, because there wasn't one. Somehow, though, 47 Advisory Group members have been selected, though we have no idea who they are or the criteria pursuant to which they were appointed.

Despite the deficiencies of the process of the Advisory Group's appointment, a couple of minor reforms have been adopted. First, a representative of the host country, in this case Hadil da Rocha Vianna of Brazil's Ministry of External Relations, now co-chairs the group. Second:

As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of information between its members and the various interested groups. It has also been requested to make proposals on a suitable rotation among its members, based on recommendations from the various interested groups. Any decision on how to prepare subsequent meetings will be taken after the Rio de Janeiro meeting in an open, inclusive and transparent consultative process, taking into account the proposals of the Advisory Group.

We've heard this all before. Why do we have to wait until after the Rio meeting until an "open, inclusive and transparent" process is used for the Advisory Group's appointment? Why couldn't such a process have been employed this time?