Hi Milton, On 8/7/14, 11:48 AM, "Milton L Mueller" <mueller@syr.edu> wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:alissa@cooperw.in]
Here is some revised landing page text that tries to capture the discussion in this thread:
Alissa: most of the discussion questioned the need for a public comment process. And yet you have proposed a public comment process.
I’ve been trying to sort through the discussion and it seemed like people wanted a short comment process to hear major objections to the charter, although I admit it’s been a little unclear how to assess people’s opinions on this. Mohamed suggested [1] on July 24 that we setup an email alias and establish a deadline for public comments, and a few people seemed to agree with that, including yourself. Based on that discussion I made a suggestion for getting going on that [2], which no one responded to, so I re-sent it [3], yielding the present thread. In this thread I saw support for a public comment email alias/forum from Patrik, Daniel, Paul, Mohamed, and I thought originally yourself (“I tend to agree with Patrik” [4]). I wasn’t quite sure what to conclude based on Adiel’s comments, but it seemed like you and he both agreed that we could check to see if anyone has major objections [5]. So, I proposed some landing page text that asked the public for comments in the form of major objections. Did I miss some discussions? Or misinterpret the bit about major objections? My personal view is that we don’t need a public comment period and the broad outlines of the charter are just fine, but I was just trying to reflect the collective will of the people who had commented on this. Thanks, Alissa [1] http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/2014-July/000414.html [2] http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/2014-July/000533.html [3] http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/2014-August/000635.html [4] http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/2014-August/000652.html [5] http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/2014-August/000759.html