Agenda of the next meeting of WS2 jURISDICTION
Dear All, I have sent the following few days ago. Quote *“Dear Greg, Dear CCWG Accountability Co-Chairs,* *I hope by sending this legitimate as a valid request I would not receive negative reactions by those distinguished and respectful people who aimed at full status quo.* *I like many others expect to see a useful, objective agenda focused on * *The impact of keeping Venu and applicable law as reluctantly consented ; by unqualified Consensus at f2f meeting and the ways and means to address that/ those impact/impacts .In so doing there is the need to identify ranges of those impacts and find solution for them .Study of applying some sort of limited immunity would be one tool to address the very problem of OFAC .We should respect and the very fundamental principle of inclusiveness, democratic ,transparent, nondiscriminatory and button-up approach as required in Multistakeholder mechanism .* *No county or rule of any country shall dominate the rules of other countries or people.* *We need to avoids taking and political orientation or motivation .We must build confidence and unit the people and NOT TO DIVIDE THEM * *Moreover, we need to address the full sovereignty of countries without subordinating their national law by the law of a specific country.* *Greg, you are urged to take a full neutral and impartial position totally put aside any entity, organization or country to which you are BELONG AND affiliated.* *You MUST act as custodian of international public interest without being biased or influenced by view of any individual.* *You need to remember that the term majority in its proper context does not count heads of several people from one or few countries who have the means and possibilities to comment.* *You need to take into account the interests of millions of the people that awaiting the decision of this group.* *You have been given or accepted a major responsibility and expected to properly, imperially and neutrally assume those responsibilities.* *Pls do not go around issues which will take us to nowhere.* *Pls tackle the heart of the problem and do whatever possible to find out the term “ Limited Immunity and find out its scope of application.* *Pls less document more efficient works * *Pls kindly do not produced tens of pages to materials in which we would be lost.* *We all count on you, and knowledge, your skills, your capability* *Good luck.* *Kavouss"* Unquote I have received an implicit ONE implicit negatives reaction from one of you which I totally ignore. I have not received any reply from Greg regarding the agenda of the first meeting after ICANN 59. I wish to reiterate that we need to focus on the Impact/ influence of location of ICANN in California and the impact/ influence of the applicable law in CALIFORNIA. No other issue is expected to be brought up at this stage . We have been wasting our time for almost one year. We knew from the very beginning that we will be faced with the arrangements proposed by Thomas and reluctantly agreed by some of us. Let us take from that point. I hope Greg would act more positively than before rather than getting into psychological and political discussions. Let us concentrate on the fact. What are the impacts? What is the problems?, One problem is OFAC What is the remedial action? One possible remedial action would be limited immunity What are other impacts?' What are other possible remedial actions regards Kavouss
Dear all, I agree that we in due time must discuss accountability improvements that are issue-driven as a consequence of ICANN’s status as a non-for-profit organization headquartered in California, and where it seems appropriate discuss remedies such as the question of partial immunity. I also agree that we should respect fundamental principles of inclusiveness, democratic, transparent, non-discriminatory and button-up approaches. But I do not agree with the insinuations saying that co-chairs have not been "fully neutral and impartial”. Instead, I find that now we all have to be professional, calm and non-emotional, and keep to the issues and possible solutions. Have a nice day! Finn Fra: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] På vegne af Kavouss Arasteh Sendt: 5. juli 2017 23:59 Til: Thomas Rickert; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Jordan Carter; Greg Shatan; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Emne: [CCWG-ACCT] Agenda of the next meeting of WS2 jURISDICTION Dear All, I have sent the following few days ago. Quote “Dear Greg, Dear CCWG Accountability Co-Chairs, I hope by sending this legitimate as a valid request I would not receive negative reactions by those distinguished and respectful people who aimed at full status quo. I like many others expect to see a useful, objective agenda focused on The impact of keeping Venu and applicable law as reluctantly consented ; by unqualified Consensus at f2f meeting and the ways and means to address that/ those impact/impacts .In so doing there is the need to identify ranges of those impacts and find solution for them .Study of applying some sort of limited immunity would be one tool to address the very problem of OFAC .We should respect and the very fundamental principle of inclusiveness, democratic ,transparent, nondiscriminatory and button-up approach as required in Multistakeholder mechanism . No county or rule of any country shall dominate the rules of other countries or people. We need to avoids taking and political orientation or motivation .We must build confidence and unit the people and NOT TO DIVIDE THEM Moreover, we need to address the full sovereignty of countries without subordinating their national law by the law of a specific country. Greg, you are urged to take a full neutral and impartial position totally put aside any entity, organization or country to which you are BELONG AND affiliated. You MUST act as custodian of international public interest without being biased or influenced by view of any individual. You need to remember that the term majority in its proper context does not count heads of several people from one or few countries who have the means and possibilities to comment. You need to take into account the interests of millions of the people that awaiting the decision of this group. You have been given or accepted a major responsibility and expected to properly, imperially and neutrally assume those responsibilities. Pls do not go around issues which will take us to nowhere. Pls tackle the heart of the problem and do whatever possible to find out the term “ Limited Immunity and find out its scope of application. Pls less document more efficient works Pls kindly do not produced tens of pages to materials in which we would be lost. We all count on you, and knowledge, your skills, your capability Good luck. Kavouss" Unquote I have received an implicit ONE implicit negatives reaction from one of you which I totally ignore. I have not received any reply from Greg regarding the agenda of the first meeting after ICANN 59. I wish to reiterate that we need to focus on the Impact/ influence of location of ICANN in California and the impact/ influence of the applicable law in CALIFORNIA. No other issue is expected to be brought up at this stage . We have been wasting our time for almost one year. We knew from the very beginning that we will be faced with the arrangements proposed by Thomas and reluctantly agreed by some of us. Let us take from that point. I hope Greg would act more positively than before rather than getting into psychological and political discussions. Let us concentrate on the fact. What are the impacts? What is the problems?, One problem is OFAC What is the remedial action? One possible remedial action would be limited immunity What are other impacts?' What are other possible remedial actions regards Kavouss
. Dear All . As I told before the entire CCWG WS1 WAS designed so that ICANN LOCATION remained in California. Otherwise the entire works done at WS1 should be redone. What I am suggesting to those supporting Mr. F. Mr. S, Mr. k and Mr. J. to just Professionally act instead of taking radical position and criticizing those who have problem on psychological and political ground .These problems include OFAC and subordination of some countries ‘s sovereignty and find solutions for the Impact / Influence of ICANN being retained in California Persian poet Sa'adi, from the 13th century, is one of the major influential Persian poets of the medieval period. He is Recognized in the literary world for the quality of his writing style and in the spiritual realm for the depth of his thoughts. "The sons of Adam are limbs of each other, Having been created of one essence. When the calamity of time affects one limb The other limbs cannot remain at rest. If you have no sympathy for the troubles (and happiness ,added by the author of the message ) of others Please show some degree of collaboration and sympathy to others Regards Kavouss On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Nigel Roberts <nigel@channelisles.net> wrote:
He doesn't /really/ mean it!
It's just business as usual in international negotiation game theory.
(It's always refreshing to watch professionals at work . . )
But I do not agree with the insinuations saying that co-chairs have not
been "fully neutral and impartial”. Instead,
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Dear all, Upon my return from Joburg, I came down with flu for a few days. Hence my late response to this list. Let me say that we, the co-Chairs, are extremely thankful for having such a great and thoughtful group to work with. The discussions before ICANN59 and during ICANN59 have been difficult, but after discussion and listening to the various positions, we are more aligned than before with respect to the way forward. It is in this context that the Co-Chairs would re-iterate the importance of our working methods which are based on individual participation. The strength of the CCWG-Accountability, which allowed us to succeed in WS1, is based on hearing the concerns of all participants and arriving at consensus positions which include as many of those participants as possible. The jurisdiction sub team has a workplan and should now focus on implementing it, so I suggest we leave the discussions to the sub team and the mailing list of that group. Having said that, I am sure that Kavouss’ points will resonate when the sub team reconvenes again. Thomas
Am 06.07.2017 um 22:50 schrieb Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>:
. Dear All . As I told before the entire CCWG WS1 WAS designed so that ICANN LOCATION remained in California. Otherwise the entire works done at WS1 should be redone. What I am suggesting to those supporting Mr. F. Mr. S, Mr. k and Mr. J. to just Professionally act instead of taking radical position and criticizing those who have problem on psychological and political ground .These problems include OFAC and subordination of some countries ‘s sovereignty and find solutions for the Impact / Influence of ICANN being retained in California Persian poet Sa'adi, from the 13th century, is one of the major influential Persian poets of the medieval period. He is Recognized in the literary world for the quality of his writing style and in the spiritual realm for the depth of his thoughts. "The sons of Adam are limbs of each other, Having been created of one essence. When the calamity of time affects one limb The other limbs cannot remain at rest. If you have no sympathy for the troubles (and happiness ,added by the author of the message ) of others Please show some degree of collaboration and sympathy to others Regards Kavouss
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Nigel Roberts <nigel@channelisles.net> wrote: He doesn't /really/ mean it!
It's just business as usual in international negotiation game theory.
(It's always refreshing to watch professionals at work . . )
But I do not agree with the insinuations saying that co-chairs have not been "fully neutral and impartial”. Instead,
_______________________________________________ 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
+ 1 to that as well. We are constrained to certain conditions and jurisdiction cannot be even thought ofin light of the conditions stipulated. Iam all for looking at what is important accountability, inclusiveness, transparency which are what we can only do. transfering jurisdiction is out of our hands.
On Jul 6, 2017, at 12:01 PM, Finn Petersen <FinPet@erst.dk> wrote:
Dear all, I agree that we in due time must discuss accountability improvements that are issue-driven as a consequence of ICANN’s status as a non-for-profit organization headquartered in California, and where it seems appropriate discuss remedies such as the question of partial immunity. I also agree that we should respect fundamental principles of inclusiveness, democratic, transparent, non-discriminatory and button-up approaches. But I do not agree with the insinuations saying that co-chairs have not been "fully neutral and impartial”. Instead, I find that now we all have to be professional, calm and non-emotional, and keep to the issues and possible solutions. Have a nice day! Finn
Fra: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] På vegne af Kavouss Arasteh Sendt: 5. juli 2017 23:59 Til: Thomas Rickert; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Jordan Carter; Greg Shatan; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Emne: [CCWG-ACCT] Agenda of the next meeting of WS2 jURISDICTION
Dear All, I have sent the following few days ago.
Quote
“Dear Greg, Dear CCWG Accountability Co-Chairs,
I hope by sending this legitimate as a valid request I would not receive negative reactions by those distinguished and respectful people who aimed at full status quo.
I like many others expect to see a useful, objective agenda focused on
The impact of keeping Venu and applicable law as reluctantly consented ; by unqualified Consensus at f2f meeting and the ways and means to address that/ those impact/impacts .In so doing there is the need to identify ranges of those impacts and find solution for them .Study of applying some sort of limited immunity would be one tool to address the very problem of OFAC .We should respect and the very fundamental principle of inclusiveness, democratic ,transparent, nondiscriminatory and button-up approach as required in Multistakeholder mechanism .
No county or rule of any country shall dominate the rules of other countries or people.
We need to avoids taking and political orientation or motivation .We must build confidence and unit the people and NOT TO DIVIDE THEM
Moreover, we need to address the full sovereignty of countries without subordinating their national law by the law of a specific country.
Greg, you are urged to take a full neutral and impartial position totally put aside any entity, organization or country to which you are BELONG AND affiliated.
You MUST act as custodian of international public interest without being biased or influenced by view of any individual.
You need to remember that the term majority in its proper context does not count heads of several people from one or few countries who have the means and possibilities to comment.
You need to take into account the interests of millions of the people that awaiting the decision of this group.
You have been given or accepted a major responsibility and expected to properly, imperially and neutrally assume those responsibilities.
Pls do not go around issues which will take us to nowhere.
Pls tackle the heart of the problem and do whatever possible to find out the term “ Limited Immunity and find out its scope of application.
Pls less document more efficient works
Pls kindly do not produced tens of pages to materials in which we would be lost.
We all count on you, and knowledge, your skills, your capability
Good luck.
Kavouss"
Unquote
I have received an implicit ONE implicit negatives reaction from one of you which I totally ignore.
I have not received any reply from Greg regarding the agenda of the first meeting after ICANN 59.
I wish to reiterate that we need to focus on the Impact/ influence of location of ICANN in California and the impact/ influence of the applicable law in CALIFORNIA.
No other issue is expected to be brought up at this stage .
We have been wasting our time for almost one year. We knew from the very beginning that we will be faced with the arrangements proposed by Thomas and reluctantly agreed by some of us.
Let us take from that point.
I hope Greg would act more positively than before rather than getting into psychological and political discussions.
Let us concentrate on the fact.
What are the impacts?
What is the problems?,
One problem is OFAC
What is the remedial action?
One possible remedial action would be limited immunity
What are other impacts?'
What are other possible remedial actions
regards
Kavouss
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Kris Seeburn seeburn.k@gmail.com www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>
participants (5)
-
Finn Petersen -
Kavouss Arasteh -
Kris Seeburn -
Nigel Roberts -
Thomas Rickert