I would normally be happy to volunteer but think it should be someone who has some idea of the actual points of contention, and I don't know enough (actually, anything) about that. He is interested in learning exactly what portions are objectionable and exploring whether there are more substantial portions where there is some agreement. I'm not sure if there can be adequate opportunity to provide that prior to Friday, but we can offer up some times subject to availability of Tony or Mark's (or anyone else who can speak to the specifics). His answer to Mark's key point below is that any strat plan cannot remain static, and changes are important and normal...even with consensus, we'll be making changes, so why not move along now and get on with it. These are my words, and not a quote, but be ready to address the general notion. -----Original Message----- From: Mark McFadden [mailto:mcfadden@21st-century-texts.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 10:21 AM To: Mansourkia, Magnolia (Maggie) Subject: RE: RE: [ispcp] A request from the community I think we should do this. Vint is very reasonable on this and I think he would listen to our argument about the current operational plan acting as a placeholder. It would be especially helpful to have this as a dialogue: perhaps Maggie and Tony leading the way. Another key point is the realization that the Strategic plan does not have consensus buy-in. Vint seems to accept that: my argument is that a Strategic Plan not built on consensus process is more dangerous than no plan at all. I can imagine the detractors of ICANN saying: "yes, you have a strategic plan; but you didn't follow your own procedures to develop it." mark

----- ------- Original Message ------- ----- From: "Mansourkia, Magnolia (Maggie)" <maggie.mansourkia@mci.com> To: Greg Ruth <greg_ruth@yahoo.com>, Mark McFadden <mcfadden@21st-century-texts.com>, ispcp@icann.org Sent: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 14:00:57

That's a good point. Maybe in the note where Mark attaches the statement, there can be a few bullet points on the strongest of arguments you guys raised at MDP. He is a little worn out today, but wants to hear us out without the background noise from MC and yesterday's larger group.

-----Original Message----- From: owner-ispcp@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-ispcp@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Ruth Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 9:45 AM To: Mark McFadden; ispcp@icann.org Cc: mcf@uwm.edu Subject: Re: [ispcp] A request from the community

Mark, I think giving our statement to Vint is a splendid idea. However, if he is looking for facts to support a cogent argument against adopting the current strat plan, namely *why* the strat plan is not a consensus document, someone would have to give him more ammunition than our statement contains. Yes, we went over all that at Mar del Plata, but some memories are short.

My $0.02, Greg

--- Mark McFadden <mcfadden@21st-century-texts.com> wrote:

...

All:

Vint Cerf has asked to see out DRAFT statement on the strategic plan. He would like to see it today. I haven't supplied it to him -- prior to getting approval from the constituency.

If you have objections to giving Vint a copy of the DRAFT version of the statement, let me know by 1630 today, Luxembourg time. If I hear objections, I'll forward a reasonable message to Vint.

mark

Mark McFadden 21st Century Texts Madison Wisconsin mcfadden@21st-century-texts.com

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Mark McFadden 21st Century Texts Madison Wisconsin mcfadden@21st-century-texts.com