[council] FW: Letter from Cherine Chalaby

[Nicolas Adam]

Put another way: everyone wants to protect RC and the like from contextual fraud, is it my failure that RC doesn't have a consensual way to do that now? 

Is it my failure that it still raise a strong principled opposition? A consensus is possible. They should write it. It's  their failure that they haven't. 


Please excuse my mobile brevity.

-----Original Message-----
From: "Nicolas Adam" <nickolas.adam at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 04:18:25 
To: Evan Leibovitch<evan at telly.org>
Reply-To: nickolas.adam at gmail.com
Cc: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU<NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
Subject: Re: [council] FW: Letter from Cherine Chalaby

They engaged in a way not conducive to get my support, that's what they did. 

They should be spearheading the search for novel ideas of how to do this *without* overreach. But they overreach instead of working to craft a compromise solution. And the work to craft the compromise solution is left to ... well, Dan I guess ... or the board ... or whatever accidentaly happens, politically.



 
Please excuse my mobile brevity.

-----Original Message-----
From: Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org>
Sender: evanleibovitch at gmail.com
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 00:11:06 
To: Nicolas Adam<nickolas.adam at gmail.com>
Cc: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU<NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
Subject: Re: [council] FW: Letter from Cherine Chalaby

On 2 July 2014 23:54, Nicolas Adam <nickolas.adam at gmail.com> wrote:


> why isn't the RC itself spearheading this?


Uh, it did, when the time for it to speak was appropriate.

At the working group level where this issue was dealt with (and in which I
was also involved), the ICRC was a very active participant (though less
aggressive than the IOC). It joined the process when it was appropriate,
then (also unlike the IOC) stopped lobbying and let the community engage,
having said all it thought needed to be said.

What were you expecting? Where is the part of the process they failed to
engage? From what i could tell, they followed the process that they thought
was appropriate.

- Evan

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20140702/55b1eb0e/attachment.htm>