+1 to Greg By the way, the deadline is today, right? I can't edit the document because I am on holiday; have very limited time & access to Internet. Is there anyone who is going to make final edits? best, Tatiana On 12/10/15 16:57, Greg Shatan wrote:
I think that there has been broad opposition to "cherry-picking" human rights. I would apply this to the Ruggie principles as well.
Greg
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.na <mailto:el@lisse.na>> wrote:
Nigel overlooked the reference to my profession, when we say "Look at" it usually involves scalpels :-)-O
So, how do the Ruggie principles look like without the subset?
el
On 2015-10-12 13:37, Nigel Roberts wrote: > Eberhard is misdirecting himself. We don't want to look at THAT subset. > > We should be looking at (in set theoretical terms) the relative > complement subset. > > > > N. > > > > > On 12/10/15 12:27, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote: >> Paul, >> >> I was not going to die in a ditch about the Ruggie principles, but why >> don't we look at your subset? >> >> el >> >> On 2015-10-11 23:03, Paul Twomey wrote: >>> Nigel >>> >>> I am of a similar view as Tatiana's below. >>> >>> My stated concern has always been with some subset sections of the >>> Ruggie principles. Not necessarily with UDHR. >>> >>> Paul >> [...] >>
-- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar) el@lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 <tel:%2B264%2081%20124%206733> (cell) PO Box 8421 \ / Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/ _______________________________________________ Wp4 mailing list Wp4@icann.org <mailto:Wp4@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
_______________________________________________ Wp4 mailing list Wp4@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4