Dear Patrik Let us not play with words Someone in ICG clearly told that ICG does not expect any input from CCGG work stream 1 I did not agree to that statement now Milton very rightly remind all of us that there is a direct link between ICG and CCWG work stream 1 . Tks Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 13 Feb 2015, at 10:38, Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> wrote:
On 13 feb 2015, at 09:15, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
'ICG does not expect any input from CCWG .I did severely disagree with that statement but since no one else than me raised that issue I did not raise it again but in CCWG I mentioned that the sole purpose of Work Steam 1 was exactly to provide the accountability required to be in place or committed before transition is take place.
My view:
There is no contradiction between the two statements. It is all a question on what you mean by "input from".
The ICG and CCWG are parallell, so none of the two groups report to each other.
There is though [of course] a requirement that there is no contradiction between the two outputs.
Because of that, coordination is needed.
But for me, that does not imply one group give input to the other, because to me "input to" implies one group report to the other, which I do not think we do.
Patrik