Dear Co-Chairs, please inform our colleague that appearances can be deceiving and in any case I have rows of witnesses that I didn't. I am however willing to explain to him in person what the variation of the well known Usenet Abbreviation ROFL means. Greetings, el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On Jun 19, 2015, at 19:06, Drazek, Keith <kdrazek@verisign.com> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs,
Please inform our colleague that he appears to have sat on his device.
Regards, Keith
On Jun 19, 2015, at 7:02 PM, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na> wrote:
ROTLPIMPHMSBAH
el
-- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On Jun 19, 2015, at 17:35, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@actonline.org> wrote:
Yes it does. I apologize. I was challenging the efficacy of a proposed accountability mechanism and was asked to support my argument. I probably should have ignored what was likely a rhetorical request but I didn't.
Sent from my Windows Phone From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse Sent: 6/19/2015 5:28 PM To: CCWG Accountability Cc: Lisse Eberhard Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [Acct-Legal] Memo - Revised Powers Chart, Voluntary Model
Dear Ch-Chairs,
not that I disagree, but does this not conflict with the "modest proposal" ventilated by same on 2015-04-31?
greetings, el
-- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 5s
On Jun 19, 2015, at 15:48, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@actonline.org> wrote:
Sigh. Okay. Failed thus far to develop binding accountability mechanisms. Failed to adhere to policies around publication of documents prior to meetings. Failed to prevent decision making prior to termination of comment periods. Developed no standard for review during the previous attempt at accountability reform (2006?) Failed to develop public metrics to hold ICANN institutions to account (such as contract compliance) Failed to listen to community consensus on singular/plural and controlled the outcome of the redress mechanisms through overly narrow mandate. Pushed ahead with new gTLD program despite a lack of operational readiness, again without consequences. Launched a staff lead review of the new gTLD program prior to any input from the community. Scheduled new round of applications (at least initially) prior to scheduled reviews. Failed to reign in the Net Mundial initiative despite community objection or specify any consequences for secret board resolutions, etc. Accepted the GC advice to protect the corporation instead of the public interest. Weakened rather than strengthened the IRP. Allowed staff to unilaterally change community agreement on registry agreements and imposed the unilateral right to amend registry agreements. Failed to implement half of the ATRT1 recommendations, again without consequences. Supported the practice of passing off all responsibility to third parties so ICANN has no risk. (.SUCKS is the latest example) First attempted to prevent an accountability component to the IANA transition and then tried to control it, insert experts, etc. rather than trusting the community to organize itself.
Just a few thoughts off the top of my head. Your turn.
Jonathan Zuck President ACT: The App Association http://Www.ACTonline.org [...]
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community