[PC-NCSG] discussing distribution of ICANN material

[Amr Elsadr]

Hi,

I didn?t read Ed?s email to be particularly accusatory in nature as others have. Perhaps a bit insensitive to a newbie staff member, who as Ed pointed out in his original email similarly to new NCSG members, might not be aware of the absence of full agreement among NCSG members to take on staff support.

Having said that, I disagree with Ed?s premise regarding Maryam?s role as staff support. I also think it would have been a better idea to raise this issue on the PC or EC lists than NCSG-DISCUSS. I suspect that might have been Ed?s intent (at least that?s what he said). If anything, it seems to me that some of the responses to his email created more awkwardness in the discussion than the original email did in itself.

Thanks.

Amr

On May 19, 2015, at 10:45 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM> wrote:

> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  
>> first I think that the admin staff was unfairly treated and got implicit accusations of wrongdoings in public list. this should be answered.
> 
> Specifics Rafik. "Implicit accusations of wrongdoing". Where did that come from?
> 
> Folks here seem to want to personalize this. Wrongdoing?
> 
> 
> I am not personalising it, I am stating how your message can be interpreted. you kept mentioning that she shared a video of her employer, stressing that part several times .then you implied that probably she was asked to do. you have no fact to support your claims so yes it is an accusation. 
> 
> 
>> 
>> regarding material distribution, there is one element we should have in mind : they are publicly available and such emails are merely notifying people about their existence. The admin support is trying to be proactive and helpful. Maryam usually check with me about sending announcements (while I still send most of them) but I gave her an implicit approval to share. we are not supposed to do gatekeeper work but we can do better job to explain the background about those public information.
>> 
>> do we really want NCSG to do content policing now? ironic situation.
> 
> Then open the list to nonmembers. Let's let Richard Hill post his pro-ITU ideas. If Steve DelBianco wants to address our members then let's allow it. Once staff starts posting substantive material it no longer is a members only list and should be open to all.
> 
> 
> straw-man argument. the list is open for NCSG members and Maryam was added to do her admin tasks. the admin staff is merely sharing public info that are already online and accessible to everyone!!!! she is not participating in policy-making, the discussion or whatever.  probably you prefer me as an elected admin worker?
> 
> Policing content? That's a rubbish accusation. A members list is for members, not staff. Or so I thought. 
> 
> 
> we are 24hour from the deadline to submit the comment on IANA stewardship and we have to spend time on this. 
> 
> Rafik 
>> 
>> 2015-05-19 16:59 GMT+09:00 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I really think we should have held a discussion of what materials are
>> appropriate to pass on to the NCSG membership in either the EC or the
>> PC.  I do not think it appropriate to have berated a staff member who is
>> attempting to help us by keeping us informed in such a public manner.
>> 
>> I think it was cruel and unnecessary.
>> 
>> avri
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> http://www.avast.com
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg