Dr. Lisse (or should I be addressing the Co-Chairs?)

Of course I've seen your emails regarding your "objection," and I have responded to them, constructively.  And you know that, as you have responded to me in that thread.  I'm sorry that your memory has failed you in that instance.

Saying that you "disagree with the summary" in no way conveys any relationship or relevance to your objections to the work plan.  It's an entirely opaque statement.  At least now you have conveyed that it is linked, in some apparently inexpressible way to your "objection".  I thought you might have had some specific disagreement with the summary itself, which might have been illuminating.  I see that is not the case, so there's nothing further I need to know.

Thank you for your reply (or rather your email to the Co-Chairs, since you chose not to reply to my direct question, for reasons unbeknownst to me).

Best regards,

Greg Shatan

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs,

iI am wondering if the gentleman has not been receiving the emails from Roelof, Tijani, Alice, the two GAC reps and myself, with the word objection in the subject line?

el

-- 
Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini

On Apr 13, 2015, at 17:09, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:

Would you care to elaborate on the specific disagreement(s)?

Greg

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na> wrote:
Just so that we get this on the record, I disagree with the summary of the two CCWG co-Chairs provided to the CWG. 

el
[...]

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