Re: [ALAC] Minority statement for the IGO-INGO identifier protection PDP Final Report
And a newer version correcting two grammar problems (thanks to Evan for catching them). Alan At 14/11/2013 01:29 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
I have replaced the sentence in question with:
The collection of Recommendations with Consensus level or Strong support, taken as a whole, do not form a cohesive and consistent set of policies. Although each individual Recommendation received sufficient support, the net result is a set of Recommendations may be incomplete and perhaps even conflicting.
and a footnote:
As an example, there may be cases where a strong protection is not recommended, but the recommendations may be silent on weaker forms of protection.
aLAN
At 13/11/2013 09:38 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Since these are modifications for clarity, I'll suggest one more. One bothered me and I now have a better idea how to express what it was.
"If the Recommendations with Consensus level or Strong support were implemented, there is no assurance that they form a cohesive and consistent set of policies."
I recall this statement being questioned by members of the working group, for it is difficult to parse. What I believe it intended is that the selection of resolutions that achieved Consensus are not together reflective of a single approach to the issue, and in some cases the statements that apparently have Consensus even seem to contradict each other.
In light of this, I suggest this re-working of the line that is clearer and more direct to the point.
"The collection of Recommendations with Consensus level or Strong support, taken as a whole, do not form a cohesive and consistent set of policies"
Thanks,
- Evan
I could support this. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>wrote:
And a newer version correcting two grammar problems (thanks to Evan for catching them). Alan
At 14/11/2013 01:29 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
I have replaced the sentence in question with:
The collection of Recommendations with Consensus level or Strong
support, taken as a whole, do not form a cohesive and consistent set of policies. Although each individual Recommendation received sufficient support, the net result is a set of Recommendations may be incomplete and perhaps even conflicting.
and a footnote:
As an example, there may be cases where a strong protection is not
recommended, but the recommendations may be silent on weaker forms of protection.
aLAN
At 13/11/2013 09:38 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Since these are modifications for clarity, I'll suggest one more. One bothered me and I now have a better idea how to express what it was.
"If the Recommendations with Consensus level or Strong support were implemented, there is no assurance that they form a cohesive and consistent set of policies."
I recall this statement being questioned by members of the working group, for it is difficult to parse. What I believe it intended is that the selection of resolutions that achieved Consensus are not together reflective of a single approach to the issue, and in some cases the statements that apparently have Consensus even seem to contradict each other.
In light of this, I suggest this re-working of the line that is clearer and more direct to the point.
"The collection of Recommendations with Consensus level or Strong support, taken as a whole, do not form a cohesive and consistent set of policies"
Thanks,
- Evan
_______________________________________________ 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...)
participants (2)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Carlton Samuels