Colleagues I have copied below part of George's posting which relate to private discussions between him, the Officers and the Credentials Committee. "Indeed, it's nice to see you stand up so publicly to talk about people being treated "equitably." Where was that sense of equity, justice and due process when you and the officers tried to have me removed from the constituency in the past few weeks, issuing private "warnings", convening a "star chamber" without any evidence or proof?" His claims that I and other officers "tried to have me removed from the constituency" are false. If he would like released the notes of a meeting he had with the Officers and three members of the Credentials Committee about his behaviour I am sure that be arranged. Liz ... Liz Williams +44 1963 364 380 +44 7824 877757
Hello On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Liz Williams<lizawilliams@mac.com> wrote:
If he would like released the notes of a meeting he had with the Officers and three members of the Credentials Committee about his behaviour I am sure that be arranged. Liz
Sure, why don't you release *all* the material, including the ridiculous letters sent to me, without any evidence, including that of August 17th? The "confidentiality" was insisted upon by your side to protect you, not me. Let's have it all out, and see who is left standing in the end. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/
Without taking sides or casting blame, I am starting to be concerned with whether the BC will be standing in the end if this list continues to be filled with personal spats and accusations. I don't know about others but I barely have the bandwidth to read all the BC and other ICANN e-mails on substantive issues of import to my client, much less for digressive disputes that leave me feeling the need to take a long hot shower after reading. Can't we find a way to disagree on issues without being disagreeable? The BC issue I am concerned about right now is that we have a proposed BC charter revision just put on the table in the last week which apparently has to be forwarded to ICANN in final form in less than two weeks. As I read that proposed charter I have concerns relating to BC members' ability to effectively advocate when they have an issue viewpoint at odds with the BC consensus, internal resolution processes, and budgeting. Is there a way we can get back on track to have a reasoned discussion of that proposal that accommodates consensus revisions in the limited time we have to consider it? Thank you for your attention. Give peace a chance. Philip S. Corwin Partner Butera & Andrews 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20004 202-347-6875 (office) 202-347-6876 (fax) 202-255-6172 (cell) "Luck is the residue of design." -- Branch Rickey -----Original Message----- From: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of George Kirikos Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 1:20 PM To: BC gnso Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] George Kirikos Hello On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Liz Williams<lizawilliams@mac.com> wrote:
If he would like released the notes of a meeting he had with the Officers and three members of the Credentials Committee about his behaviour I am sure that be arranged. Liz
Sure, why don't you release *all* the material, including the ridiculous letters sent to me, without any evidence, including that of August 17th? The "confidentiality" was insisted upon by your side to protect you, not me. Let's have it all out, and see who is left standing in the end. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/
participants (3)
-
George Kirikos -
Liz Williams -
Phil Corwin