let's stick to the substantive issues on over-empowering GAC and not get personal and start name-calling
I was rather disappointed by the approach taken in yesterday’s meeting to address concerns about the excessive and improperly balanced power being given to GAC in this “accountability” process. Rather than trying to paint people as unsympathetic or “anti-government”, it is better to address the arguments presented by those who are uncomfortable with this level of control being handed to GAC through this process. There are legitimate concerns about over-empowering one segment relative the existing structure and balance among SO-ACs, and those concerns should be addressed on their merit, without the need to resort to name-calling. Please don’t make this a debate about people who hold concerns, but rather stick to the substantive issues. Thanks, Robin
Dear All, There is no need to paint any thing 2016-01-29 20:05 GMT+01:00 Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org>:
I was rather disappointed by the approach taken in yesterday’s meeting to address concerns about the excessive and improperly balanced power being given to GAC in this “accountability” process.
Rather than trying to paint *people* as unsympathetic or “anti-government”, it is better to address the *arguments *presented by those who are uncomfortable with this level of control being handed to GAC through this process. There are legitimate concerns about over-empowering one segment relative the existing structure and balance among SO-ACs, and those concerns should be addressed on their merit, without the need to resort to name-calling.
Please don’t make this a debate about people who hold concerns, but rather stick to the substantive issues.
Thanks, Robin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
So this does not generate another long thread and so that things are not logged out of context. I was at the last meeting (though audio only), I did not observe any "people painting" but i heard people repeating their points as much as possible while the co-chairs tried as much as possible to maintain focus of the discussion to maximise time. Cheers! On 29 Jan 2016 8:06 p.m., "Robin Gross" <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
I was rather disappointed by the approach taken in yesterday’s meeting to address concerns about the excessive and improperly balanced power being given to GAC in this “accountability” process.
Rather than trying to paint *people* as unsympathetic or “anti-government”, it is better to address the *arguments *presented by those who are uncomfortable with this level of control being handed to GAC through this process. There are legitimate concerns about over-empowering one segment relative the existing structure and balance among SO-ACs, and those concerns should be addressed on their merit, without the need to resort to name-calling.
Please don’t make this a debate about people who hold concerns, but rather stick to the substantive issues.
Thanks, Robin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Seun, Position of some people from the very begining was hard and inflexible They are not looking for any compromise .Tha does not work Some people defending particular external entity ( outside CCWG ) THAT IS NOT FAIR EITHER. we v can not make evry body happy but we could try to make evrybody equally happay or equally unhappy. CONSTANT OBJECTION TO ONE PARTICULAR AC seems unfair Constant and continued objection to a gien issue is simple but proposing a soltion is difficult and requires skills MULTICULTURALISM AND SPIRIT OF understanding other's problem Kavouss 2016-01-29 23:02 GMT+01:00 Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com>:
So this does not generate another long thread and so that things are not logged out of context. I was at the last meeting (though audio only), I did not observe any "people painting" but i heard people repeating their points as much as possible while the co-chairs tried as much as possible to maintain focus of the discussion to maximise time.
Cheers! On 29 Jan 2016 8:06 p.m., "Robin Gross" <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:
I was rather disappointed by the approach taken in yesterday’s meeting to address concerns about the excessive and improperly balanced power being given to GAC in this “accountability” process.
Rather than trying to paint *people* as unsympathetic or “anti-government”, it is better to address the *arguments *presented by those who are uncomfortable with this level of control being handed to GAC through this process. There are legitimate concerns about over-empowering one segment relative the existing structure and balance among SO-ACs, and those concerns should be addressed on their merit, without the need to resort to name-calling.
Please don’t make this a debate about people who hold concerns, but rather stick to the substantive issues.
Thanks, Robin
_______________________________________________ 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 (3)
-
Kavouss Arasteh -
Robin Gross -
Seun Ojedeji