Hold us accountable

[Raoul Plommer]

That's where you're wrong Ayden. That it's all about track records on
making policy. We are here to represent the civil society as a community
and if we fail at being a tight family, we'll fail at policy too. Consensus
on effective policy is harder to reach with people that are in disarray.
You mentioned evidence but showed none. All I see is bullying. I'm saying
she has brought more people to NCSG than most but maybe I really should
substantiate that claim too.

However, this discussion shouldn't be about personal merits or failures,
but agreeing on the rules and procedures that we will work with in the
future.

-Raoul

On 11 July 2018 at 12:29, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:

> Raoul,
>
> The Adobe Connect transcript is complete. What is there is the entire chat
> history.
>
> What you perceive to be "personal attacks" are actually
> an evidence-informed analysis of what I would label poor conduct on the
> part of one of our elected representatives.
>
> Don’t make this a conversation about me. If you want to, of course, I’m
> happy to talk about what I have done for the NCSG and we can compare and
> contrast our track records.
>
> Ayden
>
> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:19, Raoul Plommer <plommer at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> I note from this email
>> <https://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-ec/2018-June/000358.html> that you
>> did not dial into the NCSG EC call last month - this was only the second EC
>> call of the year - so when only two members of the EC (Farzi, and Robin) do
>> dial in, I imagine it becomes to difficult to, as you term it, "get on with
>> the program." So before you criticise others I'd suggest you look at what
>> you bring to the table.
>>
>
> Yes, I think that could well be the only NCSG EC meeting I've missed in a
> year and it was scheduled with a two days notice. That's most probably why
> only two out of five attended it. The fact that I missed that call, hardly
> slowed down the process of accepting new members, for we comment on the
> applications on our own anyway - it's really just a very few ones we need
> to discuss.
>
> The transcript you've linked to about the software is not whole - it seems
> a lot of answers are missing, like pretty much all of Ed's comments - you
> can see people responding to them though. I can only assume that Tapani has
> answered your inquiries then too. He usually does. The form itself is
> fairly complicated, for it needs to take input both from applicants as well
> as the EC members and whatever else after the approval, so it's not really
> trivial to integrate it with the systems we have in place already. The
> contractor has also been notoriously hard to contact which has made
> rectifying the situation that little bit harder.
>
> To be honest Ayden, you do not seem to work for a better member database
> here, but slinging blame and discord.  You might think you're bringing
> heaps to the table, but lately I've seen just personal attacks at people
> from you. Treating the NCUC chair like you do is unacceptable and does no
> favors to the community. Banging doors on your way out of a live strategy
> meeting, like you did in Panama, isn't really mature behavior either so you
> might do well to have a look in the mirror also.
>
> -Raoul
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20180711/2c3b5f5a/attachment.htm>