hi, jeanetteĊ½s mail did not get through to the list, so i forward it to you. maybe mathias could check and try to get jeanette on the list again. greetings annette
Hi all,
Vittorio Bertola wrote:
Just my two cents, as a person who's been seeing how this statement is being received: I think it's the wrong kind of statement to make;
I agree with Dominic and Wolfgang. I think it is exactly the right statement to make. it
sounds like "three days after the first draft of the report, since it doesn't give us 100% of what we wanted,
I am not sure you understand what ALAC wants, Vittorio. This is not a matter of 100% or even 50%, the portray of ALAC as such is flawed.
My impression at yesterday's meeting was that the consultant hasn't understood enough of ICANN's overall structure to see and evaluate ALAC and relation to that structure.
I support a statement that rejects the report and asks for a new one. jeanette
we're ready to conclude that it
is unacceptable in its entirety, and by the way you're all corrupt, you owe obedience to us and we call for a revolt against you". I assume that this is a common tone for statements in the US, but IMHO here it is unlikely to be very well received or even considered - its only result (as we saw yesterday) will be to put your interlocutors in defensive mode.
If *RALO thinks that there are factual errors or omissions in the report, it should submit a written comment to the reviewers specifying where are the errors and providing facts to support the claim. The NARALO statement doesn't do any of that. Apart from that, the reviewers are independent and are free to conclude whatever they deem fit, others are free to disagree but challenging their legitimacy or honesty won't fly very well, and won't get them to change their report.
Alternatively, a statement to the Review WG focusing on suggestions for the way forward - what to do with the report, and why certain parts could be ignored or considered under a different light - is appropriate, but perhaps it is even too early for that, as the initial draft recommendations of the WG won't be out before Cairo. In any case, any constructive suggestion regarding how to go forward (including requests about how to address the issues that many people care about, but that clearly don't pertain to an ALAC review) would be much more useful and productive.
Ciao,
--