@ Avri, I am not accusing you. All I am concerned about is the context has changed. I assume that we can input our comments into the "comment" field etc. I have issues with the Overview which changes the context in which the call for ALAC feedback was made and has limited our options to a response to the Board. I have no issues with people holding diverse opinions and people are free to write their comments on the matter etc etc. To summarise, I am concerned about:- 1. removal of my comments from the Wiki; 2. and the change in context from what was originally put to the ALAC; 3. removing option to direct comments/submissions to the GNSO IOC/RC Draft Team On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
That sounds very accusatory. And after I just said I did nothing, you presume censorship. Hmmm.
As for my draft, that its a first statement of where I thought we were going. If the alac wishes to say something different, please do so. It its not for me to advise the alac on what it should say.
"Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:
Frankly guys I am alarmed. I disagree with the introductory statement made on the wiki and am concerned with the swift change of context as this is absolutely contrary to what was put to the ALAC.
I am alarmed at the *censorship* taking place within the ALAC itself if it indeed is taking place. I am of course optimistic and hoping that this was a technical error.
Kind Regards, Sala
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
Hi,
Don't know. I did not remove anything except the notes about placeholders.
I did have some editing problems at one point but don't see how that would delete anything.
"Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All,
I have *one simple* question. Why was my comment (submissions) removed from the Wiki? https://community.icann.org/x/wowoAg
The context has now changed to addressing the Board and not the GNSO IOC/RC Draft Team.
Kind Regards, Sala
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Alan Greenberg < alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
One short comment here. I do not agree at all. The interim protection is giving them SO much less than what they want that they could not afford to not participate actively to try to get more.
Alan
At 24/09/2012 10:19 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
I contend that if we go into this with a base level that says two and only two organizations already have base level protections at the second level, there will be no incentive for them to cooperate in a PDP that might give them less.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji
Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
Avri Doria
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji
Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
Avri Doria
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851