Disagreement on wrong interpretation of a qualifier
Dear Leon I am disappointed and frustrated by the reaction of some Co-Chairs in conducting the meeting . I had a disagreement with Mr. Satan of IPC on the above subject Due to the closed link between that person and other persons belonging to the same camp, you did not agreed with the argument that I submitted . Mr.Satan and his camp , wrong views were taken BUT what disturbed me more was your statement in saying" kavouss,if you want to continue thus discussion,continue on nailing list" Why should I do that? What was the usefulness of the meeting if an important issue should be discussed outside the call? Why I was treated ? . Kavousd Sent from my iPhone
Dear Kavouss, I am sorry you feel that way. As you know, our duty as Co-Chairs is to try to facilitate the discussion amongst all members and participants in our group. I am aware that you have expressed your disagreement with Mr. Shatan’s views in several occasions but I am also aware that, to the best of my knowledge, your disagreement has found no traction in the discussion in the meeting you are referring to, hence I thought the best way to foster and encourage discussion on the issue was to take it to the list. I apologize if my suggestion offended you or if it was perceived as being disrespectful. Of course I didn’t mean it that way at all. I trust you will understand why I suggested to take the discussion to the list and thank you for your kind observation. Best regards, León
El 12/04/2016, a las 6:54 a.m., Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> escribió:
Dear Leon I am disappointed and frustrated by the reaction of some Co-Chairs in conducting the meeting . I had a disagreement with Mr. Satan of IPC on the above subject Due to the closed link between that person and other persons belonging to the same camp, you did not agreed with the argument that I submitted . Mr.Satan and his camp , wrong views were taken BUT what disturbed me more was your statement in saying" kavouss,if you want to continue thus discussion,continue on nailing list" Why should I do that? What was the usefulness of the meeting if an important issue should be discussed outside the call? Why I was treated ? . Kavousd Sent from my iPhone
Dear Leon Tks Having no traction was due to lineup ?pre arrangement of those talked against me Others had no comments Regards Kavouss 2016-04-12 15:40 GMT+02:00 León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@sanchez.mx> :
Dear Kavouss,
I am sorry you feel that way. As you know, our duty as Co-Chairs is to try to facilitate the discussion amongst all members and participants in our group.
I am aware that you have expressed your disagreement with Mr. Shatan’s views in several occasions but I am also aware that, to the best of my knowledge, your disagreement has found no traction in the discussion in the meeting you are referring to, hence I thought the best way to foster and encourage discussion on the issue was to take it to the list.
I apologize if my suggestion offended you or if it was perceived as being disrespectful. Of course I didn’t mean it that way at all.
I trust you will understand why I suggested to take the discussion to the list and thank you for your kind observation.
Best regards,
León
El 12/04/2016, a las 6:54 a.m., Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> escribió:
Dear Leon I am disappointed and frustrated by the reaction of some Co-Chairs in conducting the meeting . I had a disagreement with Mr. Satan of IPC on the above subject Due to the closed link between that person and other persons belonging to the same camp, you did not agreed with the argument that I submitted . Mr.Satan and his camp , wrong views were taken BUT what disturbed me more was your statement in saying" kavouss,if you want to continue thus discussion,continue on nailing list" Why should I do that? What was the usefulness of the meeting if an important issue should be discussed outside the call? Why I was treated ? . Kavousd Sent from my iPhone
Dear Kavouss, I cannot jump into concluding that there is any kind of pre-arrangement against your views. The fact that as you state “others had no comments” was what led me to believe there was no traction to the issue and hence I suggested taking it to the list. Best regards, León
El 12/04/2016, a las 8:51 a.m., Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> escribió:
Dear Leon Tks Having no traction was due to lineup ?pre arrangement of those talked against me Others had no comments Regards Kavouss
2016-04-12 15:40 GMT+02:00 León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@sanchez.mx <mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>>: Dear Kavouss,
I am sorry you feel that way. As you know, our duty as Co-Chairs is to try to facilitate the discussion amongst all members and participants in our group.
I am aware that you have expressed your disagreement with Mr. Shatan’s views in several occasions but I am also aware that, to the best of my knowledge, your disagreement has found no traction in the discussion in the meeting you are referring to, hence I thought the best way to foster and encourage discussion on the issue was to take it to the list.
I apologize if my suggestion offended you or if it was perceived as being disrespectful. Of course I didn’t mean it that way at all.
I trust you will understand why I suggested to take the discussion to the list and thank you for your kind observation.
Best regards,
León
El 12/04/2016, a las 6:54 a.m., Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> escribió:
Dear Leon I am disappointed and frustrated by the reaction of some Co-Chairs in conducting the meeting . I had a disagreement with Mr. Satan of IPC on the above subject Due to the closed link between that person and other persons belonging to the same camp, you did not agreed with the argument that I submitted . Mr.Satan and his camp , wrong views were taken BUT what disturbed me more was your statement in saying" kavouss,if you want to continue thus discussion,continue on nailing list" Why should I do that? What was the usefulness of the meeting if an important issue should be discussed outside the call? Why I was treated ? . Kavousd Sent from my iPhone
I can state with absolute truthfulness and certainty that there was no pre-alignment or pre-arrangement. I resent the allegation and I'm disappointed in the thinking underlying such a statement. People agreed with me because they shared my opinion, which is not in any way intended to be US-centric. If this were a UK-law document, I would say the same thing -- that we should use terms commonly used and with settled meanings under UK law. I think it's a common sense position. Can we get back to business and avoid hatching conspiracy theories? Such thinking is below the standard set by my esteemed colleague from Iran. Greg 😈 On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 9:54 AM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía < leonfelipe@sanchez.mx> wrote:
Dear Kavouss,
I cannot jump into concluding that there is any kind of pre-arrangement against your views.
The fact that as you state “others had no comments” was what led me to believe there was no traction to the issue and hence I suggested taking it to the list.
Best regards,
León
El 12/04/2016, a las 8:51 a.m., Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> escribió:
Dear Leon Tks Having no traction was due to lineup ?pre arrangement of those talked against me Others had no comments Regards Kavouss
2016-04-12 15:40 GMT+02:00 León Felipe Sánchez Ambía < leonfelipe@sanchez.mx>:
Dear Kavouss,
I am sorry you feel that way. As you know, our duty as Co-Chairs is to try to facilitate the discussion amongst all members and participants in our group.
I am aware that you have expressed your disagreement with Mr. Shatan’s views in several occasions but I am also aware that, to the best of my knowledge, your disagreement has found no traction in the discussion in the meeting you are referring to, hence I thought the best way to foster and encourage discussion on the issue was to take it to the list.
I apologize if my suggestion offended you or if it was perceived as being disrespectful. Of course I didn’t mean it that way at all.
I trust you will understand why I suggested to take the discussion to the list and thank you for your kind observation.
Best regards,
León
El 12/04/2016, a las 6:54 a.m., Kavouss Arasteh < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> escribió:
Dear Leon I am disappointed and frustrated by the reaction of some Co-Chairs in conducting the meeting . I had a disagreement with Mr. Satan of IPC on the above subject Due to the closed link between that person and other persons belonging to the same camp, you did not agreed with the argument that I submitted . Mr.Satan and his camp , wrong views were taken BUT what disturbed me more was your statement in saying" kavouss,if you want to continue thus discussion,continue on nailing list" Why should I do that? What was the usefulness of the meeting if an important issue should be discussed outside the call? Why I was treated ? . Kavousd Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
I agree Greg. We must respect each other, without aggression. Best regards Alberto Soto De: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] En nombre de Greg Shatan Enviado el: martes, 12 de abril de 2016 11:50 a.m. Para: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@sanchez.mx> CC: Thomas Rickert <thomas@rickert.net>; Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Asunto: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Disagreement on wrong interpretation of a qualifier I can state with absolute truthfulness and certainty that there was no pre-alignment or pre-arrangement. I resent the allegation and I'm disappointed in the thinking underlying such a statement. People agreed with me because they shared my opinion, which is not in any way intended to be US-centric. If this were a UK-law document, I would say the same thing -- that we should use terms commonly used and with settled meanings under UK law. I think it's a common sense position. Can we get back to business and avoid hatching conspiracy theories? Such thinking is below the standard set by my esteemed colleague from Iran. Greg 😈 On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 9:54 AM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@sanchez.mx <mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx> > wrote: Dear Kavouss, I cannot jump into concluding that there is any kind of pre-arrangement against your views. The fact that as you state “others had no comments” was what led me to believe there was no traction to the issue and hence I suggested taking it to the list. Best regards, León El 12/04/2016, a las 8:51 a.m., Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> > escribió: Dear Leon Tks Having no traction was due to lineup ?pre arrangement of those talked against me Others had no comments Regards Kavouss 2016-04-12 15:40 GMT+02:00 León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@sanchez.mx <mailto:leonfelipe@sanchez.mx> >: Dear Kavouss, I am sorry you feel that way. As you know, our duty as Co-Chairs is to try to facilitate the discussion amongst all members and participants in our group. I am aware that you have expressed your disagreement with Mr. Shatan’s views in several occasions but I am also aware that, to the best of my knowledge, your disagreement has found no traction in the discussion in the meeting you are referring to, hence I thought the best way to foster and encourage discussion on the issue was to take it to the list. I apologize if my suggestion offended you or if it was perceived as being disrespectful. Of course I didn’t mean it that way at all. I trust you will understand why I suggested to take the discussion to the list and thank you for your kind observation. Best regards, León
El 12/04/2016, a las 6:54 a.m., Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> > escribió:
Dear Leon I am disappointed and frustrated by the reaction of some Co-Chairs in conducting the meeting . I had a disagreement with Mr. Satan of IPC on the above subject Due to the closed link between that person and other persons belonging to the same camp, you did not agreed with the argument that I submitted . Mr.Satan and his camp , wrong views were taken BUT what disturbed me more was your statement in saying" kavouss,if you want to continue thus discussion,continue on nailing list" Why should I do that? What was the usefulness of the meeting if an important issue should be discussed outside the call? Why I was treated ? . Kavousd Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________ 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 This email has been protected by YAC (Yet Another Cleaner) http://www.yac.mx
participants (4)
-
Alberto Soto -
Greg Shatan -
Kavouss Arasteh -
León Felipe Sánchez Ambía