<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
I think that the language of the letter is very soft but it's a high
level (all SOs) letter so ... . Best would be to have a letter that
said: "Fadi this is a nice try for a bad precedent and we are not
falling for it. You can bet your ass we are not yet in alignment". <br>
<br>
However, we have to contend with his agenda setting powers and it
seems to me that if we can have a harsher cross-SO "not yet in
alignment" letter, than we should strive to get it. A letter that
would counter the things you guys said he probably would stand to
gain (namely: 1) shifting blame for delay/putting pressure; 2)
creating precedents of top-down circumventions) would be optimal.
Barring the success of this, a
"we-have-received-your-flowers-thank-you-very-much-but-sadly-we-could-not-yet-determine-that-we-all-like-their-beautiful-colors-yet"
letter is in order I guess.<br>
<br>
Nicolas<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 08/08/2014 10:56 AM, Edward Morris
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:WC20140808145640.521150@milk.toast.net"
type="cite">
<div style="font-size: 13px; font-family: tahoma; color: rgb(0, 0,
0); font-weight: 400; font-style: normal; background-image:
none; background-attachment: scroll; background-origin:
padding-box; background-clip: border-box; background-color:
rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); background-size: auto; background-position: 0%
0%; background-repeat: repeat repeat;">
<div>If snarkiness is a quality that causes others to think,
that term may apply to Avri because that’s what she’s done
here to me. She’s right – this is just bad precedent.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Look, I know Mr. Chehade is trying to create sense of
urgency, a sense of crisis that we’re all supposed to respond
to by getting in alignment with whatever he proposes.
Accountability and transparency are perhaps the two most
vital issues facing ICANN today. As a Stakeholder Group we’ve
been yelling about them for years. We were largely ignored.
Now is not the time to rush to action just because the folks
who were ignoring us suddenly have a self imposed timetable to
meet. These are important issues and the structures for
resolving them need to be carefully considered.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I should also note that if alignment means supporting the
staff created proposal I’d rather be unaligned. We have
sufficient input on this list suggesting the proposal is not
the way forward. Signing the note may, amongst other things,
send the wrong message to Mr. Chehade about where we as a
stakeholder group are currently at.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks for all of your hard work on this Bill but I don’t
believe this is a note we should sign on to at the current
time.</div>
</div>
<div style="font-family: tahoma; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size:
13px; font-weight: 400; font-style: normal; background-image:
none; background-attachment: scroll; background-origin:
padding-box; background-clip: border-box; background-color:
rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); background-size: auto; background-position: 0%
0%; background-repeat: repeat repeat;">
<blockquote style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px;
MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid;
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Avri Doria <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:avri@ACM.ORG"><avri@ACM.ORG></a><br>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 10:05:45 -0400<br>
Subject: Re: Fairly Urgent: Possible Joint Statement on
Accountability<br>
<div style="font-family: monospace, courier new, courier">Hi,<br>
<br>
I don't accusing of bad intent (snarkiness) is appropriate
just because<br>
someone disagrees. My questions where quite sincere and
based on recent<br>
experience. And I have read the transcript.<br>
<br>
I think this is bad idea and I think it sets a precedent
for this new<br>
way of working that circumvents established bottom-up
processes. Fadi<br>
keeps doing it, and we keep falling right into line.<br>
<br>
I would have preferred for Jonathan, who I assume was also
at the<br>
meeting to have brought the issue to the council, and for
the council to<br>
have said stop, wait and listen.<br>
<br>
I think that this letter just sets him up to say, ok, now
the delay of<br>
game is on you guys.<br>
<br>
avri<br>
<br>
On 08-Aug-14 09:51, William Drake wrote:<br>
> Hi Avri<br>
><br>
> On Aug 8, 2014, at 3:11 PM, Avri Doria <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:avri%40ACM.ORG">avri@ACM.ORG</a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Hi,<br>
>><br>
>> I do not understand the need for it and what it
achieves.<br>
>><br>
>> Are we talking about the plan that have not been
rolled out for review<br>
>> yet? How can we be asking for more time on
something they have not<br>
>> asked us to review yet.<br>
><br>
> But we are reviewing it, I sent the material yesterday<br>
>><br>
>> As I understand it they gave the Leaders a peek,
and some of you passed<br>
>> that peek on. I am not sure what else is going on.
Are they waiting<br>
>> for reviews? Will they honor reviews? Or is
really a done deal that<br>
>> are 'agree or left behind deals'? Will we just be
adding yet another<br>
>> comment to be ignored - we can see the effect the
previous letter had.<br>
>><br>
>> I also think it is heartwarming that all you
leaders have found such<br>
>> kumbaya among yourselves for rapid creation of
letters the rest of us<br>
>> barely have time to approve. I would prefer to see
a Council channel<br>
>> used for these sorts of things.<br>
>><br>
>> i am not in favor of the note.<br>
>><br>
><br>
> Don’t understand the need for the snarkiness, but have
a look at the meeting transcript. Fadi wants to formally
release this quickly and start building the Community
Coordination Group and Assembly so they can meet before LA.
He urged all the SOs and AC chairs to move into alignment
and support the proposal, but added that "If we received
from you enough input that says give us another week so we
can do a little bit more thinking together, by all means.”
So Tony’s proposal was to say we need more time as we are
not yet in alignment. I think his idea was to see if GNSO
SG/C’s were in agreement on that and then reach out to other
SO ACs. That doesn’t make it a Council issue, but if it
offends you I suppose we can suggest he change the language
and reach out to other SO ACs now rather than later. Either
way, the idea was to give the community time to consider the
thing.<br>
><br>
> Best<br>
><br>
> Bill<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On 08-Aug-14 04:42, William Drake wrote:<br>
>>> Hi<br>
>>><br>
>>> Further to the discussion about staff’s
proposed accountability<br>
>>> mechanism, SG/constituency chairs have been
discussing a possible joint<br>
>>> statement. As agreeing on details regarding
specific concerns might take<br>
>>> some cycles and Fadi’s asked us to move quickly
into alignment, Tony<br>
>>> Holmes of the ISPCP has circulated this place
holder for collective<br>
>>> endorsement and rapid transmission. Would
people be amenable to NCSG<br>
>>> signing onto this for now, with more to come?
Bill<br>
>>><br>
>>> /During ICANN meeting 50 the entire GNSO
community came together to make<br>
>>> a statement calling for the Board to support
community creation of an<br>
>>> independent accountability mechanism. That
action clearly indicates the<br>
>>> importance of this issue to the community and
its constituent groups.<br>
>>> Since then we have closely followed this issue
and are now<br>
>>> considering //ICANN’s proposal for managing the
accountability process.<br>
>>> However at this stage it would be both prudent
and timely to advise you<br>
>>> that currently there is no alignment within the
GNSO community on the<br>
>>> proposed approach or process proposed by ICANN.
Discussions are on-going<br>
>>> and it is our intention to offer a more
detailed statement of our<br>
>>> concerns as early as possible next week./<br>
>>> /<br>
>>> /<br>
>>> Bill<br>
>>><br>
>>> ***********************************************<br>
>>> William J. Drake<br>
>>> International Fellow & Lecturer<br>
>>> Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ<br>
>>> University of Zurich, Switzerland<br>
>>> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency,<br>
>>> ICANN, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ncuc.org" target="_blank">
www.ncuc.org</a> <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ncuc.org" target="_blank">
http://www.ncuc.org</a>><br>
>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:william.drake%40uzh.ch">william.drake@uzh.ch</a>
<br>
>>> <mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:william.drake%40uzh.ch">
william.drake@uzh.ch</a>> (direct), <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:wjdrake%40gmail.com">
wjdrake@gmail.com</a><br>
>>> <mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:wjdrake%40gmail.com">
wjdrake@gmail.com</a>> (lists),<br>
>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.williamdrake.org" target="_blank">
www.williamdrake.org</a> <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.williamdrake.org" target="_blank">http://www.williamdrake.org</a>><br>
>>> ***********************************************<br>
>>><br>
><br>
></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>