On Oct 21, 2015 8:42 AM, "Dr Eberhard W Lisse" <el@lisse.na> wrote:

Dear Co-Chairs,

could you please explain to our young colleague again that only
appointed members get to object.

greetings, el

On 2015-10-21 12:08 , Seun Ojedeji wrote:
> The meeting seem to be consistent with what was earlier shared as the
> outcome of the meeting with SO/AC leadership prior to Dublin.
>
> Hence since the objection word seem to be a hobby now, I like to
> "object" to the objection made.
>
> Regards
>
> Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
> Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>
> On 21 Oct 2015 11:37, "Nigel Roberts" <nigel@channelisles.net
> <mailto:nigel@channelisles.net>> wrote:
>
>     I agree with Dr Lisse's  objection to this meeting.
>
>     I cordially and heartily disapprove of such failures to give notice
>     (whether well-intentioned or otherwise, which is doubtful) which
>     inevitably appear to lead to perceptions they are designed to reduce
>     or eliminate the attendance of those who would be opposed to such
>     deals as appears to be common knowledge may or may not have already
>     been reached behind closed doors.
>
>     It really IS Back to the Future Day today. And today is the day, I
>     fear that we are going to repeat the events of 1998 in how the IFWP
>     ended in the unilateral creation of ICANN, just as I predicted some
>     months back.
>
>     What I could not have predicted is how ironic that this is done today.
>
>
>     http://www.martymcflycountdown.com/
>
>
>     On 21/10/15 07:04, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
>
>         I object and protest against springing meetings on the members
>         without notice, that clash with others and have the effect of
>         reducing participation.
>
>         el
[...]


_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community