[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] [[--This message had format issues and was not translated properly--]] Subject:Re: Nota de Contracte Party House (CPH) sobre revisión At-Large Desde:Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob@gmail.com> Dear, Here is a motion by Alejandro seconded by Carlos Raúl. It is for the foregoing that the corresponding procedure will be given. Therefore, we will submit this motion to 10 days of discussion starting today and if we achieve consensus we will transmit it to ALAC. The deadline is Wednesday, May 31 at 23:59 UTC.If there is no consensus, a vote will be called whose details will be communicated within 5 days after May 31. Copy to our secretary to coordinate with the staff the opening of a wiki. regards Humberto Carrasco Blanc Lawyer Associate Professor Economic-Commercial Law Universidad Católica del Norte - Coquimbo LLM Queen Mary University of London PhD University of Edinburgh The 20-05-2018, at 18:49, Carlos Raul Gutierrez <crg@isoc-cr.org> wrote: In response to a question from one of the readers of this list, I want to clarify that I am 100% in agreement with the following proposal by Alejandor Pisanty "The only way forward is to review ALAC's answers with deep self-criticism, and not let them be officially transmitted in our representation until they are satisfactory, and in parallel, to focus the expenditure of energy, time and other resources of LACRALO to the sutantivas proposals.The representatives and officials of LACRALO must notify the ALAC that a proposal will be prepared and processed as necessary to build it before, during and after the ongoing electoral process, with the commitment of the new entrants to carry it out immediately. " Person for my lack of clarity. As for the progress of the mediation process, I have written a separate note for Alejandro, updating him on the process and I await his comments. I hope my comments are understood in this spirit Happy week Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez ISOC Costa Rica Chapter skype carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 ________ Section 1571-1000 COSTA RICA 2018-05-20 11:18 GMT-06: 00 Carlos Raul Gutierrez <carlosraul@gutierrez.se> : Thanks Alejandro 100% according to your comments On May 20, 2018 10:32:18 AM CST, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty@gmail.com> wrote: Alberto, Thank you for sharing these two statements of opinion from relevant groups of ICANN.While it is possible to disagree with aspects of each of them, especially the sectarian view that has taken over the NCSG, and others that will surely come, it is also possible to note that the complacency and lack of self-criticism that give rise to the ALAC proposal are being paid at a fair price. This is not without its clear reflection in LACRALO, where the failure of the mediation process manifests itself in the repetition of the vices mentioned in the Review, in which the same old quarrels that gave rise to the conflict have been revived in non-public forums. place to mediation, and above all, to continue without focus on the development of policies, which was the number one agreement of mediation in February 2017.The only way forward is to review ALAC's responses with deep self-criticism, and not allow them to be transmitted officially in our representation until they are satisfactory; and in parallel, focus the expenditure of energy, time and other resources of LACRALO to the proposals sutantivas. The representatives and officials of LACRALO must notify ALAC that a proposal will be prepared and process what is necessary to build it before, during and after the ongoing electoral process, with the commitment of the new entrants to carry it out immediately. Alejandro Pisanty 2018-05-20 10:23 GMT-05: 00 Alberto Soto <asoto@ibero-americano.org> : Dear, in the note of NSCG, this note of the Contracted Party House is mentioned, whose terms are similar for the At-Large Review. It is an unofficial translation and the short link to see the original published in ICANNhttps://goo.gl/NQzaVC Best regards Alberto Soto May 7, 2018 FAO: Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) of ICANN Board and Cherine Chalaby, Chairman of the ICANN Board Re: Statement of concern for At-Large Review Implementation Implementation Proposal Dear members of Cherine and the Committee: On behalf of the Contracted Party House (CPH) I would like to express our deep concern with the content and intent of the General Proposal for Implementation of the At-Large Review, which was published on April 20, 2018. This proposal follows the 2017 At-Large Review.During the public comment period CPH, among many other SO / AC, sent critical comments that were subsequently included in the recommendations in the final report of ITEMS International. These recommendations, together with the feasibility assessment of the At-Large review and recommendations, and the ICANN staff designed the implementation plan with direct questions for ALAC. The CPH considers that the aforementioned proposal does not address these issues, nor does it respond to the specific criticisms raised in the At-Large review report. In fact, all the recommendations have been rejected or modified.Furthermore, if the proposal is adopted by the OEC and the ICANN Board without the ALAC properly addressing the concerns of the wider ICANN community, this would set an alarming precedent for any future ICANN review. If critical opinions and recommendations, particularly those that are widely supported within the ICANN community, are perceived as ultimately ignorant, The ICANN reviews will lose credibility. The CPH believes that the Organizational Effectiveness Committee of the ICANN Board should not consider the ALAC proposal until such time as ALAC provides a detailed response that addresses the criticisms raised by the At-Large review report, and the questions kindly gathered by the ICANN staff. This response must be submitted to the entire ICANN community, so that any additional input or discussion with the community can be arranged, to see the Review to an appropriate end. Yours sincerely, Graeme Bunton Chair RrSG _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es http: //www.lacralo. org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Faculty of Chemistry UNAM Av.Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico + 52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 FROM MEXICO SMS +525541444475 Blog:http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Join the UNAM group on LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---- >> Join ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Join the UNAM group on LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---- >> Join ISOC Mexico, http: // www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Join the UNAM group on LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---- >> Join ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---- >> Join ISOC Mexico, http ://www.isoc.org. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ---- >> Join ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es http: //www.lacralo. org _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es http: //www.lacralo. org [[--Original text (es) Translated by transbot 2.18-2.04 http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/850ae891ea.html --]]