Colleagues

 

With regard to the messages from Mr. Baione I received the following notification:  “Why is this message in Spam?  It’s from an address in the yahoo.com domain but has failed yahoo.com’s required tests for authentication.”  Mr. Baione’s SOI is here: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Ronald+Baione-Doda+SOI 

 

Regards

Paul

 

Paul Rosenzweig

paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com

O: +1 (202) 547-0660

M: +1 (202) 329-9650

VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739

Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066

Link to my PGP Key

 

 

From: Ron Baione [mailto:ron.baione@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 1:15 PM
To: Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl>; accountability-cross-community@icann.org
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Meeting location

 

Again, I would like the community and the Ombudsman to make note of that Direct and viscious insult calling me Mr. "Baloney". The name-calling on this mailing list appears to be part of the ccwg culture, sadly. I can understand why people would be hesitant to submit new ideas or comments to this email list, but insults should not deter the good work being accomplished by ccwg-accountability.

"I, probably like quite a few others on this list, fail to see the link between your message below and the subject of this thread (“Meeting location”).

The message reference the Ombudsman's comment about polite discourse, not sure how you missed that part of the email, regardless of the "subject" of the email, most people respond to the "contents" of an email.

"During our last CCWG call, I commented on the number of emails we all have to deal with and the fact that practically in every mail thread of this group, there’s growing divergence between the title of the thread and the content of submissions of some as the discussion proceeds."

Again, the subject of an email is less relevant than the contents of an email.

"A factor that makes it very difficult for the reader to just read those emails that are worth the time."

We all have a certain level of dedication to the imoortant work of ccwg-accountability. If you can't read all the emails, may I suggest receiving the "digest" of emails? Not sure how to solve your issue of not being to read each and every email in full. There are classes on time-management, but that is your call, obviously.

"I would greatly appreciate it if you would stick to the good practice of ensuring that the content of your message is aligned with subject specified in the header."

That is not a "practice" good or bad, that I have ever heard of so my answer is no unless you can provide a source proving the existence of such a practice, thanks.

Ron

 

From: Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl>;
To: Ron Baione <ron.baione@yahoo.com>; accountability-cross-community@icann.org <accountability-cross-community@icann.org>;
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Meeting location
Sent: Fri, Oct 16, 2015 7:46:00 AM

 

Dear mr. Baloney,

 

I, probably like quite a few others on this list, fail to see the link between your message below and the subject of this thread (“Meeting location”).

During our last CCWG call, I commented on the number of emails we all have to deal with and the fact that practically in every mail thread of this group, there’s growing divergence between the title of the thread and the content of submissions of some as the discussion proceeds. 

A factor that makes it very difficult for the reader to just read those emails that are worth the time.

 

I would greatly appreciate it if you would stick to the good practice of ensuring that the content of your message is aligned with subject specified in the header.

 

Best,

 

Roelof Meijer

 

From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Ron Baione <ron.baione@yahoo.com>
Date: vrijdag 16 oktober 2015 01:45
To: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad@icann.org>, "accountability-cross-community@icann.org" <accountability-cross-community@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Meeting location

 

It's not a policy on polite discourse if it is not enforced, especially when someone can be directly, publicly insulted without any fear of the Ombusdmans ability to enforce that policy. It is clear that after being publicly referred to impolitely and unfairly objectified as a "troll", an "it", "a silicone based lifeform", labeled as "hostile", and told to "give it a rest" simply for trying to participate and share new ideas, there is no actual ability for the Ombudsman to enforce the policy being referred to.

The very fact that the Ombusdman already sent a note previously asking members of this list to follow the policy on polite discourse, prior to my being assigned as a participant to CCWG-Accountability, shows me that there has long needed to be some sort of special review of the comments made by members of this mailing list to see if there is a atmosphere of disrespect that for some reason has evolved over a lengthy period of time. After such a review of the distractions, the real work of completing the ICANN transition process will be more successful in my opinion. Can the Ombudsman comment on this proposal and/or perform such a review?

Ron

 

From: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad@icann.org>;
To: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org>;
Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Meeting location
Sent: Thu, Oct 15, 2015 10:58:48 PM

 

Dear all, 

 

For those who are attending in person, the CCWG meeting will take place in Liffey Hall on the 1st floor on the convention center. I sent information about the shuttles to/from the hotel in a prior email. 

 

For those attending remotely, please join us via the virtual meeting room at: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/dub54-liffeyhall2/ 

 

As a reminder, all ICANN meetings (including the chat rooms and mailing lists) follow ICANN’s Expected Standards of Behavior. For reference these are located here: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2012-05-15-en. In the words of the ICANN Ombudsman from a note he sent to this list on 22 June: "May I implore participants to continue to note the ICANN policy on polite discourse. It is important to have a strong and vigorous debate but we don't need to make personal attacks on each other. A polite note of disagreement should be sufficient, and has been frequently used. But if we start to attack individuals on list, this will distract us from the real tasks.” 

 

Looking forward to seeing you in 8 hours, 

Grace