it would be too difficult to ban every person who directly insulted me for unexplained reasons (other than my lack of being a CEO with a cool business card), every person who directly insulted the ombudsman, every person who conjured the image of the ombudsman getting a spanking from a paddle, tthose who unfairly insinuated about me, and/or posted well-deserved personal awards, proclaimed the results of a consensus that was never asked for, and/or posted "trivia time".

RBD


From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na>;
To: CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community@icann.org>;
Cc: Lisse Eberhard <directors@omadhina.net>;
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] FW: Email Lists / SOI s
Sent: Sun, Oct 25, 2015 8:17:26 PM

From the Charter:

"The co-chairs are empowered to restrict the participation of someone who seriously disrupts the working group. Generally, the participant should first be warned privately, and then warned publicly before such a restriction is put into place; in extreme circumstances, this requirement may be bypassed. This restriction is subject to the right of appeal as outlined above. "

Though interestingly there no appeal mechanism outlined "above" :-)-O


greetings, el


-- 
Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini

On 25 Oct 2015, at 19:54, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.NA> wrote:

s/Support/Charter/

el

On 2015-10-25 19:44 , Greg Shatan wrote:
Support.

On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Ron Baione via
Accountability-Cross-Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org
<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>> wrote:

   All SOI's should be reviewed how? Based on what metric? What shall
   be the required attendence level?

   Ron
[...]