Dear All, I replied to the entire team Sorry for misunderstanding I do not agree with these change except the clear deletion to any document which has not been yet agreed . NO BLANKET AGREEMENT Rergards Kavouss 2016-05-01 19:02 GMT+02:00 Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com>:
You replied to my text as if you disagree with what I say when indeed we seem to be saying the same thing; which is that the current wording is sufficient.
Regards
Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 1 May 2016 17:58, "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All, I do not believe to start drafting at this stage., " For avoidance of any doubt" and " for the sake of clarity" are the same and serve the porpoises equally. As for the phrase " "*nothing in the preceding sentence should be construed to suggest that it does have authority to impose such regulations.*" It also is clear and I see no reason to use any other words or terms as those suggested. It make the sentence more heavy in reading and opneded the door for interpretation's Pls keep the texts it they were without any changes Kavouss
2016-05-01 14:40 GMT+02:00 Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com>:
Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 29 Apr 2016 6:52 p.m., "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
"What does "such regulations" refer to?"
SO: It seem to refer to "governmentally authorized regulatory authority,..." which is appropriately noted in the section referenced.
For clarity (better put, "for avoidance of doubt"), I don't think see any lack of clarity to resolve here.
Regards
If we want to save the last clause, things get more complicated. It could be changed to say "nothing in the preceding sentence should be construed to suggest that it does have such authority." Now it's clear that "such authority" refers to "governmentally authorized regulatory authority." It could also be changed to say "nothing in the preceding sentence should be construed to suggest that it does have authority to impose governmentally authorized regulations." However, I'm not sure that either of these are particularly useful statements or add any clarity to the situation. (The first is modestly more useful than the second.)
I look forward to any thoughts.
Greg
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community