CCWG informal gathering at IGF
Dear all, As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal. Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be there for the IGF. In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how we could organize for work. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF... <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF...> This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the best out of it. Best regards, León
I do not agree that this is tolerable. el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On 27 Oct 2015, at 00:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@sanchez.mx> wrote:
Dear all,
As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal.
Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be there for the IGF.
In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how we could organize for work.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF...
This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the best out of it.
Best regards,
León _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Dear Leon Thanks for suggestion but I have a very intense agenda till 27 November thus do not attend IGF . However I am very much involved in this issue Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 27 Oct 2015, at 00:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@sanchez.mx> wrote:
Dear all,
As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal.
Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be there for the IGF.
In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how we could organize for work.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF...
This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the best out of it.
Best regards,
León _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Dear Co-Chairs As a Participant I find this development highly irregular. It is most exclusionary of participation for a number of both Participants and Members, I find. Are such meetings permitted by the Charter? Furthermore it will not be transparent, as absent staff support there will be no record, recording or transcription. In any event, although I have not done such in the past, I feel strongly enough about this to formally raise my concerns to the Ombudsman, and trust he will be able to discuss this proposal with the WG in order mediate a position that may alleviate the serious concerns about the integrity of the process here. I regret the necessity for this. Nigel Roberts On 26/10/15 23:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
Dear all,
As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal.
Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be there for the IGF.
In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how we could organize for work.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF...
This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the best out of it.
Best regards,
León
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
This is not a meeting of the CCWG but rather a room for CCWG participants to work together in. NO decisions or work that would not have already taken place outside of the formal CCWG meetings will take place. It is merely a way for the CCWG participants who find themselves in Brazil to be able to find each other easily. -James On 27/10/2015, 4:08 p.m., "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs
As a Participant I find this development highly irregular.
It is most exclusionary of participation for a number of both Participants and Members, I find.
Are such meetings permitted by the Charter?
Furthermore it will not be transparent, as absent staff support there will be no record, recording or transcription.
In any event, although I have not done such in the past, I feel strongly enough about this to formally raise my concerns to the Ombudsman, and trust he will be able to discuss this proposal with the WG in order mediate a position that may alleviate the serious concerns about the integrity of the process here.
I regret the necessity for this.
Nigel Roberts
On 26/10/15 23:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
Dear all,
As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal.
Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be there for the IGF.
In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how we could organize for work.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF...
This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the best out of it.
Best regards,
León
_______________________________________________ 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
James, I have a great deal of respect and affection for both you and Leon. However, your email and Leon's email do not align. Leon's email clearly envisages two three hour sessions in a "room in which to work." And that work is identified as "a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal." And the next step is to figure out "how to organize for work." With the ultimate goal to "make the best out of" this "great opportunity to finalize our drafting." This does not sound like merely the "CCWG Lounge," and suspicions, once aroused, tend to be inflamed rather than assuaged by statements that can be seen as "move along folks, nothing to see here." This may not have been your intention, especially since your vision for this serendipitous gathering seems quite different than Leon's, but unfortunately it has that effect. I suggest that this ill-conceived gathering be rethought or abandoned. As stated, it sadly fails any test of transparency, accountability or inclusiveness. Greg On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:27 PM, James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net> wrote:
This is not a meeting of the CCWG but rather a room for CCWG participants to work together in. NO decisions or work that would not have already taken place outside of the formal CCWG meetings will take place. It is merely a way for the CCWG participants who find themselves in Brazil to be able to find each other easily.
-James
On 27/10/2015, 4:08 p.m., " accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs
As a Participant I find this development highly irregular.
It is most exclusionary of participation for a number of both Participants and Members, I find.
Are such meetings permitted by the Charter?
Furthermore it will not be transparent, as absent staff support there will be no record, recording or transcription.
In any event, although I have not done such in the past, I feel strongly enough about this to formally raise my concerns to the Ombudsman, and trust he will be able to discuss this proposal with the WG in order mediate a position that may alleviate the serious concerns about the integrity of the process here.
I regret the necessity for this.
Nigel Roberts
On 26/10/15 23:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
Dear all,
As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal.
Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be there for the IGF.
In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how we could organize for work.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF...
This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the best out of it.
Best regards,
León
_______________________________________________ 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
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Hi I suggest to hold the meeting in a room that has remote participation equipment and allows everyone to participate. otherwise I don't think it should be held. If you hold the meeting early in the morning you might be able to hold it in a workshop room that has remote participation equipment. or you can hold it after the official meetings. But doubtful that we can get a room for 3 hours ... Best Farzaneh On 27 October 2015 at 17:42, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
James,
I have a great deal of respect and affection for both you and Leon. However, your email and Leon's email do not align. Leon's email clearly envisages two three hour sessions in a "room in which to work." And that work is identified as "a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal." And the next step is to figure out "how to organize for work." With the ultimate goal to "make the best out of" this "great opportunity to finalize our drafting."
This does not sound like merely the "CCWG Lounge," and suspicions, once aroused, tend to be inflamed rather than assuaged by statements that can be seen as "move along folks, nothing to see here." This may not have been your intention, especially since your vision for this serendipitous gathering seems quite different than Leon's, but unfortunately it has that effect.
I suggest that this ill-conceived gathering be rethought or abandoned. As stated, it sadly fails any test of transparency, accountability or inclusiveness.
Greg
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:27 PM, James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net> wrote:
This is not a meeting of the CCWG but rather a room for CCWG participants to work together in. NO decisions or work that would not have already taken place outside of the formal CCWG meetings will take place. It is merely a way for the CCWG participants who find themselves in Brazil to be able to find each other easily.
-James
On 27/10/2015, 4:08 p.m., " accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs
As a Participant I find this development highly irregular.
It is most exclusionary of participation for a number of both Participants and Members, I find.
Are such meetings permitted by the Charter?
Furthermore it will not be transparent, as absent staff support there will be no record, recording or transcription.
In any event, although I have not done such in the past, I feel strongly enough about this to formally raise my concerns to the Ombudsman, and trust he will be able to discuss this proposal with the WG in order mediate a position that may alleviate the serious concerns about the integrity of the process here.
I regret the necessity for this.
Nigel Roberts
On 26/10/15 23:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
Dear all,
As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal.
Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be there for the IGF.
In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how we could organize for work.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF...
This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the best out of it.
Best regards,
León
_______________________________________________ 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
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
-- Farzaneh
Dear All, Pls do not exclude the views of those who have constructively and intensely contributed to the CCWG during the last 10 months should they not be ablke to attend IGF. Pls kindly avoid to organize a meeting in which all interested parties do not have the opportunity to attend the meeting Kavouss 2015-10-27 17:49 GMT+01:00 farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>:
Hi
I suggest to hold the meeting in a room that has remote participation equipment and allows everyone to participate. otherwise I don't think it should be held. If you hold the meeting early in the morning you might be able to hold it in a workshop room that has remote participation equipment. or you can hold it after the official meetings. But doubtful that we can get a room for 3 hours ...
Best
Farzaneh
On 27 October 2015 at 17:42, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
James,
I have a great deal of respect and affection for both you and Leon. However, your email and Leon's email do not align. Leon's email clearly envisages two three hour sessions in a "room in which to work." And that work is identified as "a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal." And the next step is to figure out "how to organize for work." With the ultimate goal to "make the best out of" this "great opportunity to finalize our drafting."
This does not sound like merely the "CCWG Lounge," and suspicions, once aroused, tend to be inflamed rather than assuaged by statements that can be seen as "move along folks, nothing to see here." This may not have been your intention, especially since your vision for this serendipitous gathering seems quite different than Leon's, but unfortunately it has that effect.
I suggest that this ill-conceived gathering be rethought or abandoned. As stated, it sadly fails any test of transparency, accountability or inclusiveness.
Greg
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:27 PM, James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net> wrote:
This is not a meeting of the CCWG but rather a room for CCWG participants to work together in. NO decisions or work that would not have already taken place outside of the formal CCWG meetings will take place. It is merely a way for the CCWG participants who find themselves in Brazil to be able to find each other easily.
-James
On 27/10/2015, 4:08 p.m., " accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs
As a Participant I find this development highly irregular.
It is most exclusionary of participation for a number of both Participants and Members, I find.
Are such meetings permitted by the Charter?
Furthermore it will not be transparent, as absent staff support there will be no record, recording or transcription.
In any event, although I have not done such in the past, I feel strongly enough about this to formally raise my concerns to the Ombudsman, and trust he will be able to discuss this proposal with the WG in order mediate a position that may alleviate the serious concerns about the integrity of the process here.
I regret the necessity for this.
Nigel Roberts
On 26/10/15 23:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
Dear all,
As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal.
Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be there for the IGF.
In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how we could organize for work.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF...
This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the best out of it.
Best regards,
León
_______________________________________________ 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
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
-- Farzaneh
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Hi, I will be in João Passoa, but the time slot conflict with other obligations I have at the IGF. I personally do not see any problem with groups of people getting together to discuss the issues anytime, anywhere they can. Obviously no decisions will be made, but who know, maybe the germ of idea that can feed into g=future solution might be formed. I am grateful the space will be provided even though I do not expect to be able to join in. I bet, though, that I will not escape a week of IGF without talking about ICANN accountability endlessly in all sorts of little groupings. The IGF is a forum for people to meet and talk about all sorts of stuff without deciding anything. avri On 27-Oct-15 12:42, Greg Shatan wrote:
James,
I have a great deal of respect and affection for both you and Leon. However, your email and Leon's email do not align. Leon's email clearly envisages two three hour sessions in a "room in which to work." And that work is identified as "a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal." And the next step is to figure out "how to organize for work." With the ultimate goal to "make the best out of" this "great opportunity to finalize our drafting."
This does not sound like merely the "CCWG Lounge," and suspicions, once aroused, tend to be inflamed rather than assuaged by statements that can be seen as "move along folks, nothing to see here." This may not have been your intention, especially since your vision for this serendipitous gathering seems quite different than Leon's, but unfortunately it has that effect.
I suggest that this ill-conceived gathering be rethought or abandoned. As stated, it sadly fails any test of transparency, accountability or inclusiveness.
Greg
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:27 PM, James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net <mailto:james@cyberinvasion.net>> wrote:
This is not a meeting of the CCWG but rather a room for CCWG participants to work together in. NO decisions or work that would not have already taken place outside of the formal CCWG meetings will take place. It is merely a way for the CCWG participants who find themselves in Brazil to be able to find each other easily.
-James
On 27/10/2015, 4:08 p.m., "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net <mailto:nigel@channelisles.net>> wrote:
>Dear Co-Chairs > >As a Participant I find this development highly irregular. > >It is most exclusionary of participation for a number of both >Participants and Members, I find. > >Are such meetings permitted by the Charter? > >Furthermore it will not be transparent, as absent staff support there >will be no record, recording or transcription. > >In any event, although I have not done such in the past, I feel strongly >enough about this to formally raise my concerns to the Ombudsman, and >trust he will be able to discuss this proposal with the WG in order >mediate a position that may alleviate the serious concerns about the >integrity of the process here. > >I regret the necessity for this. > > > >Nigel Roberts > >On 26/10/15 23:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF >> in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue >> advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal. >> >> Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 >> and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note >> that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to >> provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this >> informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a >> plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be >> there for the IGF. >> >> In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know >> who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this >> work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your >> name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how >> we could organize for work. >> >> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF... >> >> >> This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the >> best out of it. >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> >> León >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list >> Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community >> >_______________________________________________ >Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list >Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto: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
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Agree Avri Jonathan Zuck President ACT: The App Association On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 9:59 AM -0700, "Avri Doria" <avri@acm.org<mailto:avri@acm.org>> wrote: Hi, I will be in João Passoa, but the time slot conflict with other obligations I have at the IGF. I personally do not see any problem with groups of people getting together to discuss the issues anytime, anywhere they can. Obviously no decisions will be made, but who know, maybe the germ of idea that can feed into g=future solution might be formed. I am grateful the space will be provided even though I do not expect to be able to join in. I bet, though, that I will not escape a week of IGF without talking about ICANN accountability endlessly in all sorts of little groupings. The IGF is a forum for people to meet and talk about all sorts of stuff without deciding anything. avri On 27-Oct-15 12:42, Greg Shatan wrote:
James,
I have a great deal of respect and affection for both you and Leon. However, your email and Leon's email do not align. Leon's email clearly envisages two three hour sessions in a "room in which to work." And that work is identified as "a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal." And the next step is to figure out "how to organize for work." With the ultimate goal to "make the best out of" this "great opportunity to finalize our drafting."
This does not sound like merely the "CCWG Lounge," and suspicions, once aroused, tend to be inflamed rather than assuaged by statements that can be seen as "move along folks, nothing to see here." This may not have been your intention, especially since your vision for this serendipitous gathering seems quite different than Leon's, but unfortunately it has that effect.
I suggest that this ill-conceived gathering be rethought or abandoned. As stated, it sadly fails any test of transparency, accountability or inclusiveness.
Greg
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:27 PM, James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net <mailto:james@cyberinvasion.net>> wrote:
This is not a meeting of the CCWG but rather a room for CCWG participants to work together in. NO decisions or work that would not have already taken place outside of the formal CCWG meetings will take place. It is merely a way for the CCWG participants who find themselves in Brazil to be able to find each other easily.
-James
On 27/10/2015, 4:08 p.m., "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net <mailto:nigel@channelisles.net>> wrote:
>Dear Co-Chairs > >As a Participant I find this development highly irregular. > >It is most exclusionary of participation for a number of both >Participants and Members, I find. > >Are such meetings permitted by the Charter? > >Furthermore it will not be transparent, as absent staff support there >will be no record, recording or transcription. > >In any event, although I have not done such in the past, I feel strongly >enough about this to formally raise my concerns to the Ombudsman, and >trust he will be able to discuss this proposal with the WG in order >mediate a position that may alleviate the serious concerns about the >integrity of the process here. > >I regret the necessity for this. > > > >Nigel Roberts > >On 26/10/15 23:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF >> in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue >> advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal. >> >> Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 >> and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note >> that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to >> provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this >> informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a >> plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be >> there for the IGF. >> >> In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know >> who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this >> work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your >> name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how >> we could organize for work. >> >> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF... >> >> >> This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the >> best out of it. >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> >> León >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list >> Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community >> >_______________________________________________ >Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list >Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto: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
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
To be clear, I am not proposing a "gag order" at IGF. As I said earlier, this has as much standing in the CCWG's work as a conversation over drinks in the hotel bar. Good ideas often germinate in informal conversations such as that or those that will take place at IGF, whether or not there is a room set aside for such purposes. So, while I agree with Avri, I must point out again that this vision of casual yet potentially productive conversations among CCWG wonks (and between CCWG wonks and outside observers of the CCWG) does not align with Leon's proposal to "finalize our drafting." If there is going to be formal work planned around a particular objective, that should follow all of our rules of engagement. Greg P.S. I've solved many of the world's problems in extended late-night pub conversations. The problem is that you rarely remember the solution the next morning (or if you do, it makes no sense absent the rosy glow of the night before). On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@actonline.org> wrote:
Agree *Avri*
Jonathan Zuck President ACT: The App Association
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 9:59 AM -0700, "Avri Doria" <avri@acm.org> wrote:
Hi,
I will be in João Passoa, but the time slot conflict with other obligations I have at the IGF.
I personally do not see any problem with groups of people getting together to discuss the issues anytime, anywhere they can. Obviously no decisions will be made, but who know, maybe the germ of idea that can feed into g=future solution might be formed.
I am grateful the space will be provided even though I do not expect to be able to join in. I bet, though, that I will not escape a week of IGF without talking about ICANN accountability endlessly in all sorts of little groupings. The IGF is a forum for people to meet and talk about all sorts of stuff without deciding anything.
avri
On 27-Oct-15 12:42, Greg Shatan wrote:
James,
I have a great deal of respect and affection for both you and Leon. However, your email and Leon's email do not align. Leon's email clearly envisages two three hour sessions in a "room in which to work." And that work is identified as "a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal." And the next step is to figure out "how to organize for work." With the ultimate goal to "make the best out of" this "great opportunity to finalize our drafting."
This does not sound like merely the "CCWG Lounge," and suspicions, once aroused, tend to be inflamed rather than assuaged by statements that can be seen as "move along folks, nothing to see here." This may not have been your intention, especially since your vision for this serendipitous gathering seems quite different than Leon's, but unfortunately it has that effect.
I suggest that this ill-conceived gathering be rethought or abandoned. As stated, it sadly fails any test of transparency, accountability or inclusiveness.
Greg
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:27 PM, James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net <mailto:james@cyberinvasion.net <james@cyberinvasion.net>>> wrote:
This is not a meeting of the CCWG but rather a room for CCWG participants to work together in. NO decisions or work that would not have already taken place outside of the formal CCWG meetings will take place. It is merely a way for the CCWG participants who find themselves in Brazil to be able to find each other easily.
-James
On 27/10/2015, 4:08 p.m., "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net <mailto:nigel@channelisles.net <nigel@channelisles.net>>> wrote:
>Dear Co-Chairs > >As a Participant I find this development highly irregular. > >It is most exclusionary of participation for a number of both >Participants and Members, I find. > >Are such meetings permitted by the Charter? > >Furthermore it will not be transparent, as absent staff support there >will be no record, recording or transcription. > >In any event, although I have not done such in the past, I feel strongly >enough about this to formally raise my concerns to the Ombudsman, and >trust he will be able to discuss this proposal with the WG in order >mediate a position that may alleviate the serious concerns about the >integrity of the process here. > >I regret the necessity for this. > > > >Nigel Roberts > >On 26/10/15 23:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF >> in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue >> advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal. >> >> Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 >> and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note >> that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to >> provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this >> informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a >> plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be >> there for the IGF. >> >> In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know >> who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this >> work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your >> name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how >> we could organize for work. >> >>
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF...
>> >> >> This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the >> best out of it. >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> >> León >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list >> Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
<Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community >> >_______________________________________________ >Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list >Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
<Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>>
>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
<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
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________ 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
Dear All, Finalisation of our work at IGF is meant excluding those who are unable to attend either physically or virtually. That meeting should be considered totally informal. Why one should be excluded even if he or she intensively contributed to the works of CCWG during the last 10 months Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 27 Oct 2015, at 18:16, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
To be clear, I am not proposing a "gag order" at IGF. As I said earlier, this has as much standing in the CCWG's work as a conversation over drinks in the hotel bar. Good ideas often germinate in informal conversations such as that or those that will take place at IGF, whether or not there is a room set aside for such purposes.
So, while I agree with Avri, I must point out again that this vision of casual yet potentially productive conversations among CCWG wonks (and between CCWG wonks and outside observers of the CCWG) does not align with Leon's proposal to "finalize our drafting." If there is going to be formal work planned around a particular objective, that should follow all of our rules of engagement.
Greg
P.S. I've solved many of the world's problems in extended late-night pub conversations. The problem is that you rarely remember the solution the next morning (or if you do, it makes no sense absent the rosy glow of the night before).
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@actonline.org> wrote: Agree Avri
Jonathan Zuck President ACT: The App Association
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 9:59 AM -0700, "Avri Doria" <avri@acm.org> wrote:
Hi,
I will be in João Passoa, but the time slot conflict with other obligations I have at the IGF.
I personally do not see any problem with groups of people getting together to discuss the issues anytime, anywhere they can. Obviously no decisions will be made, but who know, maybe the germ of idea that can feed into g=future solution might be formed.
I am grateful the space will be provided even though I do not expect to be able to join in. I bet, though, that I will not escape a week of IGF without talking about ICANN accountability endlessly in all sorts of little groupings. The IGF is a forum for people to meet and talk about all sorts of stuff without deciding anything.
avri
On 27-Oct-15 12:42, Greg Shatan wrote:
James,
I have a great deal of respect and affection for both you and Leon. However, your email and Leon's email do not align. Leon's email clearly envisages two three hour sessions in a "room in which to work." And that work is identified as "a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal." And the next step is to figure out "how to organize for work." With the ultimate goal to "make the best out of" this "great opportunity to finalize our drafting."
This does not sound like merely the "CCWG Lounge," and suspicions, once aroused, tend to be inflamed rather than assuaged by statements that can be seen as "move along folks, nothing to see here." This may not have been your intention, especially since your vision for this serendipitous gathering seems quite different than Leon's, but unfortunately it has that effect.
I suggest that this ill-conceived gathering be rethought or abandoned. As stated, it sadly fails any test of transparency, accountability or inclusiveness.
Greg
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:27 PM, James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net <mailto:james@cyberinvasion.net>> wrote:
This is not a meeting of the CCWG but rather a room for CCWG participants to work together in. NO decisions or work that would not have already taken place outside of the formal CCWG meetings will take place. It is merely a way for the CCWG participants who find themselves in Brazil to be able to find each other easily.
-James
On 27/10/2015, 4:08 p.m., "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net <mailto:nigel@channelisles.net>> wrote:
>Dear Co-Chairs > >As a Participant I find this development highly irregular. > >It is most exclusionary of participation for a number of both >Participants and Members, I find. > >Are such meetings permitted by the Charter? > >Furthermore it will not be transparent, as absent staff support there >will be no record, recording or transcription. > >In any event, although I have not done such in the past, I feel strongly >enough about this to formally raise my concerns to the Ombudsman, and >trust he will be able to discuss this proposal with the WG in order >mediate a position that may alleviate the serious concerns about the >integrity of the process here. > >I regret the necessity for this. > > > >Nigel Roberts > >On 26/10/15 23:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF >> in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue >> advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal. >> >> Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 >> and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note >> that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to >> provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this >> informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a >> plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be >> there for the IGF. >> >> In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know >> who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this >> work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your >> name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how >> we could organize for work. >> >> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF... >> >> >> This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the >> best out of it. >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> >> León >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list >> Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community >> >_______________________________________________ >Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list >Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto: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
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Hi Avri, in Joao Passao the macrocosm meets the microcosm. And if two "cosms" meet, there is a lot of eFlow among INOPIs(ideas, nuances, opinions, positions and information). This is the good part of the BUMP. HIDAH! (Homework is done at home). That´s why we have the IGF. Wolfgang -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org im Auftrag von Jonathan Zuck Gesendet: Di 27.10.2015 18:01 An: avri@acm.org; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG informal gathering at IGF Agree Avri Jonathan Zuck President ACT: The App Association On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 9:59 AM -0700, "Avri Doria" <avri@acm.org<mailto:avri@acm.org>> wrote: Hi, I will be in João Passoa, but the time slot conflict with other obligations I have at the IGF. I personally do not see any problem with groups of people getting together to discuss the issues anytime, anywhere they can. Obviously no decisions will be made, but who know, maybe the germ of idea that can feed into g=future solution might be formed. I am grateful the space will be provided even though I do not expect to be able to join in. I bet, though, that I will not escape a week of IGF without talking about ICANN accountability endlessly in all sorts of little groupings. The IGF is a forum for people to meet and talk about all sorts of stuff without deciding anything. avri On 27-Oct-15 12:42, Greg Shatan wrote:
James,
I have a great deal of respect and affection for both you and Leon. However, your email and Leon's email do not align. Leon's email clearly envisages two three hour sessions in a "room in which to work." And that work is identified as "a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal." And the next step is to figure out "how to organize for work." With the ultimate goal to "make the best out of" this "great opportunity to finalize our drafting."
This does not sound like merely the "CCWG Lounge," and suspicions, once aroused, tend to be inflamed rather than assuaged by statements that can be seen as "move along folks, nothing to see here." This may not have been your intention, especially since your vision for this serendipitous gathering seems quite different than Leon's, but unfortunately it has that effect.
I suggest that this ill-conceived gathering be rethought or abandoned. As stated, it sadly fails any test of transparency, accountability or inclusiveness.
Greg
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:27 PM, James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net <mailto:james@cyberinvasion.net>> wrote:
This is not a meeting of the CCWG but rather a room for CCWG participants to work together in. NO decisions or work that would not have already taken place outside of the formal CCWG meetings will take place. It is merely a way for the CCWG participants who find themselves in Brazil to be able to find each other easily.
-James
On 27/10/2015, 4:08 p.m., "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net <mailto:nigel@channelisles.net>> wrote:
>Dear Co-Chairs > >As a Participant I find this development highly irregular. > >It is most exclusionary of participation for a number of both >Participants and Members, I find. > >Are such meetings permitted by the Charter? > >Furthermore it will not be transparent, as absent staff support there >will be no record, recording or transcription. > >In any event, although I have not done such in the past, I feel strongly >enough about this to formally raise my concerns to the Ombudsman, and >trust he will be able to discuss this proposal with the WG in order >mediate a position that may alleviate the serious concerns about the >integrity of the process here. > >I regret the necessity for this. > > > >Nigel Roberts > >On 26/10/15 23:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF >> in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue >> advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal. >> >> Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 >> and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note >> that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to >> provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this >> informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a >> plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be >> there for the IGF. >> >> In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know >> who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this >> work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your >> name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how >> we could organize for work. >> >> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF... >> >> >> This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let's make the >> best out of it. >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> >> León >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list >> Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community >> >_______________________________________________ >Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list >Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> >https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto: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
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
I have to agree with Eberhard and Nigel. This gathering has no more standing than a group of participants meeting in a bar and discussing CCWG matters. The suggestion that this group could conceivably "finalize our drafting" on anything is extremely distressing. Cavalierly dismissing the idea of remote participation or staff support further underscores the illegitimacy of this "meeting," since ICANN will provide staff support and remote support for any duly scheduled meeting of the CCWG or any duly constituted subgroup of the CCWG at any time, on reasonable notice (which is more like 24-48 hours, and this "rump caucus" would be meeting nearly 3 weeks from now). I have to assume that the rigors of travel and chairmanship have caused a temporary lack of good judgment on the part of our otherwise level-headed co-chair. Greg On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Nigel Roberts <nigel@channelisles.net> wrote:
Dear Co-Chairs
As a Participant I find this development highly irregular.
It is most exclusionary of participation for a number of both Participants and Members, I find.
Are such meetings permitted by the Charter?
Furthermore it will not be transparent, as absent staff support there will be no record, recording or transcription.
In any event, although I have not done such in the past, I feel strongly enough about this to formally raise my concerns to the Ombudsman, and trust he will be able to discuss this proposal with the WG in order mediate a position that may alleviate the serious concerns about the integrity of the process here.
I regret the necessity for this.
Nigel Roberts
On 26/10/15 23:43, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
Dear all,
As discussed in our last session, a lot of us will be attending the IGF in João Pessoa, Brazil, and it would be a good opportunity to continue advancing our work to finalize the drafting of the proposal.
Pedro has kindly arranged a room for us to work on Tuesday, November 10 and on Friday, November 13, from 9 am to 12 pm both days. Please note that since this is not a formal CCWG meeting, ICANN will not be able to provide staff support or any remote participation capability for this informal meeting. Of course, no travel support either as this is only a plan to take advantage of the situation that many of us will already be there for the IGF.
In order to organize ourselves, I suggest as a first step that we know who is attending so that we can figure out the logistics to make this work. Therefore, I would kindly encourage you to please fill in your name in the spreadsheet linked below so we can have a better idea of how we could organize for work.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1diDLY_uFmvqkpPmI858MfRx4_0FMTGYLMuDF...
This is a great opportunity to finalize our drafting. Let’s make the best out of it.
Best regards,
León
_______________________________________________ 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
participants (10)
-
"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" -
Avri Doria -
Dr Eberhard W Lisse -
farzaneh badii -
Greg Shatan -
James Gannon -
Jonathan Zuck -
Kavouss Arasteh -
León Felipe Sánchez Ambía -
Nigel Roberts