Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [Ws2-jurisdiction] Documents for upcoming meeting
It gives me no pleasure to report that a coup from the top was achieved at yesterday's call based meeting of the jurisdiction sub-group. The CCWG and sub group chairs together simply decided that the CCWG jurisdiction sub-group will no longer discuss the jurisdiction question, however paradoxical and comical it sounds. What they actually proclaimed was of course more circuitously worded -- something like, people can discuss the jurisdiction question as long as it is not, even by any distant implication, about any change in the jurisdictional status quo!! Wonder, what really then is the jurisdiction issue that they can discuss, but then Orwell did tell us a lot about such political speak. One is also reminded of the consumer's unlimited right to buy black Ford cars. regretfully, parminder On Wednesday 14 June 2017 11:50 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
All,
In addition to the agenda, the summaries we will discuss are attached.
Also attached is the chart containing the "raw" statements made during the prior call (plus the changes suggested by Thiago on the list), as well as a distillation of those statements (since a number were essentially repetitive or overlapping).
Greg
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
This cannot go unanswered. After nearly a year of fruitless discussion, about issues that the majority of the Subgroup thought were irrelevant and/or outside of our mandate, the subgroup finally decided to move on. The questions were amply aired and debated. This was not a coup from the top. On the contrary it reflect the views of the subgroup which simply did not share your view. Paul Paul Rosenzweig <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/> www.redbranchconsulting.com My PGP Key: <https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684> https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684 From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of parminder Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 1:32 AM To: ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org; Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [Ws2-jurisdiction] Documents for upcoming meeting It gives me no pleasure to report that a coup from the top was achieved at yesterday's call based meeting of the jurisdiction sub-group. The CCWG and sub group chairs together simply decided that the CCWG jurisdiction sub-group will no longer discuss the jurisdiction question, however paradoxical and comical it sounds. What they actually proclaimed was of course more circuitously worded -- something like, people can discuss the jurisdiction question as long as it is not, even by any distant implication, about any change in the jurisdictional status quo!! Wonder, what really then is the jurisdiction issue that they can discuss, but then Orwell did tell us a lot about such political speak. One is also reminded of the consumer's unlimited right to buy black Ford cars. regretfully, parminder On Wednesday 14 June 2017 11:50 AM, Greg Shatan wrote: All, In addition to the agenda, the summaries we will discuss are attached. Also attached is the chart containing the "raw" statements made during the prior call (plus the changes suggested by Thiago on the list), as well as a distillation of those statements (since a number were essentially repetitive or overlapping). Greg _______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
Hi, At the very least it means that there should a minority statement or several minority statements reflecting the lack of unity in the group. avri On 15-Jun-17 09:34, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:
This cannot go unanswered. After nearly a year of fruitless discussion, about issues that the majority of the Subgroup thought were irrelevant and/or outside of our mandate, the subgroup finally decided to move on. The questions were amply aired and debated. This was not a coup from the top. On the contrary it reflect the views of the subgroup which simply did not share your view.
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com>
O: +1 (202) 547-0660
M: +1 (202) 329-9650
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
www.redbranchconsulting.com <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/>
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684
*From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] *On Behalf Of *parminder *Sent:* Thursday, June 15, 2017 1:32 AM *To:* ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org; Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [Ws2-jurisdiction] Documents for upcoming meeting
It gives me no pleasure to report that a coup from the top was achieved at yesterday's call based meeting of the jurisdiction sub-group. The CCWG and sub group chairs together simply decided that the CCWG jurisdiction sub-group will no longer discuss the jurisdiction question, however paradoxical and comical it sounds. What they actually proclaimed was of course more circuitously worded -- something like, people can discuss the jurisdiction question as long as it is not, even by any distant implication, about any change in the jurisdictional status quo!! Wonder, what really then is the jurisdiction issue that they can discuss, but then Orwell did tell us a lot about such political speak. One is also reminded of the consumer's unlimited right to buy black Ford cars.
regretfully, parminder
On Wednesday 14 June 2017 11:50 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
All,
In addition to the agenda, the summaries we will discuss are attached.
Also attached is the chart containing the "raw" statements made during the prior call (plus the changes suggested by Thiago on the list), as well as a distillation of those statements (since a number were essentially repetitive or overlapping).
Greg
_______________________________________________
Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
_______________________________________________ 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
Sorry I missed these meetings. avri On 15-Jun-17 01:31, parminder wrote:
It gives me no pleasure to report that a coup from the top was achieved at yesterday's call based meeting of the jurisdiction sub-group. The CCWG and sub group chairs together simply decided that the CCWG jurisdiction sub-group will no longer discuss the jurisdiction question, however paradoxical and comical it sounds. What they actually proclaimed was of course more circuitously worded -- something like, people can discuss the jurisdiction question as long as it is not, even by any distant implication, about any change in the jurisdictional status quo!! Wonder, what really then is the jurisdiction issue that they can discuss, but then Orwell did tell us a lot about such political speak. One is also reminded of the consumer's unlimited right to buy black Ford cars.
regretfully, parminder
On Wednesday 14 June 2017 11:50 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
All,
In addition to the agenda, the summaries we will discuss are attached.
Also attached is the chart containing the "raw" statements made during the prior call (plus the changes suggested by Thiago on the list), as well as a distillation of those statements (since a number were essentially repetitive or overlapping).
Greg
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
_______________________________________________ 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
Avri, You did attend the first of the two full meetings we held on this subject. In the email from staff forwarding the transcript, decision, etc., from this second meeting, you will even see that Thomas cited one of your contributions from the first meeting. Greg On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 2:21 PM, avri doria <avri@apc.org> wrote:
Sorry I missed these meetings.
avri
On 15-Jun-17 01:31, parminder wrote:
It gives me no pleasure to report that a coup from the top was achieved at yesterday's call based meeting of the jurisdiction sub-group. The CCWG and sub group chairs together simply decided that the CCWG jurisdiction sub-group will no longer discuss the jurisdiction question, however paradoxical and comical it sounds. What they actually proclaimed was of course more circuitously worded -- something like, people can discuss the jurisdiction question as long as it is not, even by any distant implication, about any change in the jurisdictional status quo!! Wonder, what really then is the jurisdiction issue that they can discuss, but then Orwell did tell us a lot about such political speak. One is also reminded of the consumer's unlimited right to buy black Ford cars.
regretfully, parminder
On Wednesday 14 June 2017 11:50 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
All,
In addition to the agenda, the summaries we will discuss are attached.
Also attached is the chart containing the "raw" statements made during the prior call (plus the changes suggested by Thiago on the list), as well as a distillation of those statements (since a number were essentially repetitive or overlapping).
Greg
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
_______________________________________________ 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
My error, sorry I missed the meeting where the decision was taken. ( to indicate how confused I got by the meeting schedule, I thought I had missed the Plenary meeting that was just cancelled for next week - and somehow thought it had also been discussed there. that is where 'meetings' came from.) avri On 15-Jun-17 14:38, Greg Shatan wrote:
Avri,
You did attend the first of the two full meetings we held on this subject. In the email from staff forwarding the transcript, decision, etc., from this second meeting, you will even see that Thomas cited one of your contributions from the first meeting.
Greg
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 2:21 PM, avri doria <avri@apc.org <mailto:avri@apc.org>> wrote:
Sorry I missed these meetings.
avri
On 15-Jun-17 01:31, parminder wrote: > > It gives me no pleasure to report that a coup from the top was > achieved at yesterday's call based meeting of the jurisdiction > sub-group. The CCWG and sub group chairs together simply decided that > the CCWG jurisdiction sub-group will no longer discuss the > jurisdiction question, however paradoxical and comical it sounds. What > they actually proclaimed was of course more circuitously worded -- > something like, people can discuss the jurisdiction question as long > as it is not, even by any distant implication, about any change in the > jurisdictional status quo!! Wonder, what really then is the > jurisdiction issue that they can discuss, but then Orwell did tell us > a lot about such political speak. One is also reminded of the > consumer's unlimited right to buy black Ford cars. > > regretfully, parminder > > On Wednesday 14 June 2017 11:50 AM, Greg Shatan wrote: >> All, >> >> In addition to the agenda, the summaries we will discuss are attached. >> >> Also attached is the chart containing the "raw" statements made >> during the prior call (plus the changes suggested by Thiago on the >> list), as well as a distillation of those statements (since a number >> were essentially repetitive or overlapping). >> >> Greg >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list >> Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org <mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction> > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 <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 <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
_______________________________________________ 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 <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
Hello Greg, For those who did not attend(like myself), do you mind sharing the decision of the group during the last meeting as it concerns jurisdiction matter? Regards On 15 Jun 2017 7:38 PM, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Avri,
You did attend the first of the two full meetings we held on this subject. In the email from staff forwarding the transcript, decision, etc., from this second meeting, you will even see that Thomas cited one of your contributions from the first meeting.
Greg
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 2:21 PM, avri doria <avri@apc.org> wrote:
Sorry I missed these meetings.
avri
On 15-Jun-17 01:31, parminder wrote:
It gives me no pleasure to report that a coup from the top was achieved at yesterday's call based meeting of the jurisdiction sub-group. The CCWG and sub group chairs together simply decided that the CCWG jurisdiction sub-group will no longer discuss the jurisdiction question, however paradoxical and comical it sounds. What they actually proclaimed was of course more circuitously worded -- something like, people can discuss the jurisdiction question as long as it is not, even by any distant implication, about any change in the jurisdictional status quo!! Wonder, what really then is the jurisdiction issue that they can discuss, but then Orwell did tell us a lot about such political speak. One is also reminded of the consumer's unlimited right to buy black Ford cars.
regretfully, parminder
On Wednesday 14 June 2017 11:50 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
All,
In addition to the agenda, the summaries we will discuss are attached.
Also attached is the chart containing the "raw" statements made during the prior call (plus the changes suggested by Thiago on the list), as well as a distillation of those statements (since a number were essentially repetitive or overlapping).
Greg
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
_______________________________________________ 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
Seun It is in the notes that were just published -- Paul Rosenzweig Sent from myMail app for Android Thursday, 15 June 2017, 03:30PM -04:00 from Seun Ojedeji seun.ojedeji@gmail.com :
Hello Greg,
For those who did not attend(like myself), do you mind sharing the decision of the group during the last meeting as it concerns jurisdiction matter?
Regards
On 15 Jun 2017 7:38 PM, "Greg Shatan" < gregshatanipc@gmail.com > wrote:
Avri,
You did attend the first of the two full meetings we held on this subject. In the email from staff forwarding the transcript, decision, etc., from this second meeting, you will even see that Thomas cited one of your contributions from the first meeting.
Greg
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 2:21 PM, avri doria < avri@apc.org > wrote:
Sorry I missed these meetings.
avri
On 15-Jun-17 01:31, parminder wrote:
It gives me no pleasure to report that a coup from the top was achieved at yesterday's call based meeting of the jurisdiction sub-group. The CCWG and sub group chairs together simply decided that the CCWG jurisdiction sub-group will no longer discuss the jurisdiction question, however paradoxical and comical it sounds. What they actually proclaimed was of course more circuitously worded -- something like, people can discuss the jurisdiction question as long as it is not, even by any distant implication, about any change in the jurisdictional status quo!! Wonder, what really then is the jurisdiction issue that they can discuss, but then Orwell did tell us a lot about such political speak. One is also reminded of the consumer's unlimited right to buy black Ford cars.
regretfully, parminder
On Wednesday 14 June 2017 11:50 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
All,
In addition to the agenda, the summaries we will discuss are attached.
Also attached is the chart containing the "raw" statements made during the prior call (plus the changes suggested by Thiago on the list), as well as a distillation of those statements (since a number were essentially repetitive or overlapping).
Greg
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
_______________________________________________ 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
Seun, Everything is at https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=66068505 B. On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Greg,
For those who did not attend(like myself), do you mind sharing the decision of the group during the last meeting as it concerns jurisdiction matter?
Regards
On 15 Jun 2017 7:38 PM, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc@gmail.com> wrote:
Avri,
You did attend the first of the two full meetings we held on this subject. In the email from staff forwarding the transcript, decision, etc., from this second meeting, you will even see that Thomas cited one of your contributions from the first meeting.
Greg
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 2:21 PM, avri doria <avri@apc.org> wrote:
Sorry I missed these meetings.
avri
On 15-Jun-17 01:31, parminder wrote:
It gives me no pleasure to report that a coup from the top was achieved at yesterday's call based meeting of the jurisdiction sub-group. The CCWG and sub group chairs together simply decided that the CCWG jurisdiction sub-group will no longer discuss the jurisdiction question, however paradoxical and comical it sounds. What they actually proclaimed was of course more circuitously worded -- something like, people can discuss the jurisdiction question as long as it is not, even by any distant implication, about any change in the jurisdictional status quo!! Wonder, what really then is the jurisdiction issue that they can discuss, but then Orwell did tell us a lot about such political speak. One is also reminded of the consumer's unlimited right to buy black Ford cars.
regretfully, parminder
On Wednesday 14 June 2017 11:50 AM, Greg Shatan wrote:
All,
In addition to the agenda, the summaries we will discuss are attached.
Also attached is the chart containing the "raw" statements made during the prior call (plus the changes suggested by Thiago on the list), as well as a distillation of those statements (since a number were essentially repetitive or overlapping).
Greg
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
_______________________________________________ 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
On 15-Jun-17 14:38, Greg Shatan wrote:
you will even see that Thomas cited one of your contributions from the first meeting
I have now read the captioning - am very grateful for captioning and recommend we do it for all AC meetings in ICANN. Quoting the captioning from Thomas: And so I would establish in the minutes of this call that we focus on the solution that gets most traction. Recognizing that this does not eliminate, as I think Avri said during last week's call, that we can discuss all issues that might arise during the deliberations. But that we actually focus on the status quo being Californian law and place of incorporation. And California and work on solutions that are founded on this very recommendation. I would like to discuss this. I did say that we should work on the _assumption _that we were going to maintain the status quo and should try and solve all of the issues on that basis. I did not mean to limit what the solutions might be and certainly had no intention of limiting the set to exclude talk of immunities. Immunities, seem to me, to be one of the tools that could make the status quo more palatable to those who don't and can't accept it. So while I proposed that conversation of moving be put aside, until and unless, we found problems that could not be rmedied in any other way, I did not intend that proposal to be understood as putting aside discussion of all possible immunities. This would not include all possible immunities as some of the current accountability measure rely on access to California courts. But not all possible immunities necessarily contradict the assumptions of our current model. I believe we should still be open to discussing those. To the degree that the current decision is immutable, after one reading, on excluding both a planned move and discussion of any immunities, I do not support the decision. I do support putting aside any discussion of moving or of immunities incompatible with our current accountability schemes, but also do support discussion of possible immunities/remedies that do not harm the current accountability schemes. thanks avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
On 15 Jun 2017 8:53 PM, "avri doria" <avri@apc.org> wrote: To the degree that the current decision is immutable, after one reading, on excluding both a planned move and discussion of any immunities, I do not support the decision. I do support putting aside any discussion of moving or of immunities incompatible with our current accountability schemes, but also do support discussion of possible immunities/remedies that do not harm the current accountability schemes. SO: FWIW, I will add my +1 to the above statement. Regards thanks avri --- 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
Thanks to Avri for her clarifications and bringing some common sense to this issue. kind regards Jorge ________________________________ Von: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> Datum: 15. Juni 2017 um 22:18:22 MESZ An: avri doria <avri@apc.org> Cc: accountability-cross-community@icann.org <accountability-cross-community@icann.org>, ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [Ws2-jurisdiction] Documents for upcoming meeting On 15 Jun 2017 8:53 PM, "avri doria" <avri@apc.org<mailto:avri@apc.org>> wrote: To the degree that the current decision is immutable, after one reading, on excluding both a planned move and discussion of any immunities, I do not support the decision. I do support putting aside any discussion of moving or of immunities incompatible with our current accountability schemes, but also do support discussion of possible immunities/remedies that do not harm the current accountability schemes. SO: FWIW, I will add my +1 to the above statement. Regards thanks avri --- 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<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
I do understand the need to pass to actual work at this point, but for the sake of the record and since this matter will be taken up at/by the plenary, I would also say that my personal position is closest to Avri's as expressed in this thread. Best, 2017-06-15 22:51 GMT+02:00 <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>:
Thanks to Avri for her clarifications and bringing some common sense to this issue.
kind regards
Jorge
________________________________
Von: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> Datum: 15. Juni 2017 um 22:18:22 MESZ An: avri doria <avri@apc.org> Cc: accountability-cross-community@icann.org <accountability-cross- community@icann.org>, ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org> Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [Ws2-jurisdiction] Documents for upcoming meeting
On 15 Jun 2017 8:53 PM, "avri doria" <avri@apc.org<mailto:avri@apc.org>> wrote:
To the degree that the current decision is immutable, after one reading, on excluding both a planned move and discussion of any immunities, I do not support the decision. I do support putting aside any discussion of moving or of immunities incompatible with our current accountability schemes, but also do support discussion of possible immunities/remedies that do not harm the current accountability schemes.
SO: FWIW, I will add my +1 to the above statement.
Regards
thanks avri
--- 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<mailto:Acc ountability-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
-- Raphaël Beauregard-Lacroix Sciences Po Law School 2014-2017 LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rapha%C3%ABl-beauregard-lacroix-88733786/> - @rbl0012 <https://twitter.com/rbl0112> - M: +33 7 86 39 18 15
participants (8)
-
avri doria -
Bernard Turcotte -
Greg Shatan -
Jorge.Cancio＠bakom.admin.ch -
parminder -
Paul Rosenzweig -
Raphaël BEAUREGARD-LACROIX -
Seun Ojedeji