Dear Greg I am in full agreement with Thiago We have heard what you said to think of some limit for any issue raised by each participant and the total number of issues included in the report of the sub group just as objectives . It is unwise and premature to make a definitive decision on any of the two above- mentioned subject as unfortunately after almost 40 meeting we are at the beginning of the end as I asked you in South African CCWG meeting. Moreover there is no decision yet on these matters. Your objective thoughts are understood to be considered depending on the no.of issues submitted in the cluster of issues. Pls kindly do not insist on your views even if agreed by some as it was disagreed by others I. Parminder, Thiago, and Seun disagreed to that provisional limit in a definitive manner nor agreed by the total no. of issues to be I included in the report. You repeatedly pushed for that limit and some of us repeatedly and politely objected to that. The distinguished chair is kindly required to take all views into account and not the views of some. There was no consensus on your proposal and the criteria of majority against minority does not to prevail as the current problem is brought to the group by minority of the participants as some minor majority do not face that serious problem at all. Pls I appeal for your indulgence and kind collaboration and fair treatment, Before receiving the issues , it is inappropriate to make any decision as we do not know what will be submitted and how the issues may be clustered or grouped With my best regards Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 21 Aug 2017, at 09:02, Thiago Braz Jardim Oliveira <thiago.jardim@itamaraty.gov.br> wrote:
Dear Greg,
Please correct me if I'm mistaken. As far as I'm aware of, the subgroup has NOT (at least not yet) chosen to limit the number of issues there will be in any final report. So, to my understanding, your suggestion that "we will need to select a handful of issues (likely, 2 to 4)" goes beyond what has been discussed or even hinted at by the subgroup. In fact, with regard to the more basic question as to the number of issues each participant are to suggest for consideration (obviously all with the expectation that they will be retained in a final report to the extent possible), there was NOT significant support for your initial proposed path that would have limited it to "one man/woman one issue".
So I'd encourage us not to put the cart before the horse (again) and try to be as efficient as possible in the treatment of the issues participants will have proposed. This could probably lead us to have in a final report more than the "likely, 2 to 4" issues that you suggest, which number the subgroup has never even suggested would be satisfactory.
Best,
Thiago
PS: on a related note, it is regrettable that the message to the list informing all participants that they will have until the 21 August to post issues for consideration was only sent on the very 21 August.
De: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org [ws2-jurisdiction-bounces@icann.org] em nome de Greg Shatan [gregshatanipc@gmail.com] Enviado: segunda-feira, 21 de agosto de 2017 0:32 Para: ws2-jurisdiction Cc: acct-staff@icann.org Assunto: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Jurisdiction Subgroup: The (Revised) Path Forward
At our 16 August meeting, we discussed the initial “Path Forward” proposal and various comments from participants. We arrived at the following approach to produce Subgroup recommendations.
11 October Deadline:
· Based on the overall timeline for Work Stream 2, the Subgroup has until 11 October to submit a draft report and set of recommendations to the Plenary for first reading.
· In other words, we have about seven (7) weeks to develop a draft set of issues and recommendations and come to consensus on these.
A Handful of Issues: We will need to select a handful of issues (likely, 2 to 4) which:
· Are within our remit.
· Will result in recommendations that achieve consensus in the Subgroup.
The Challenge: Everyone will have to compromise in order to finalize this limited number of issues over the next very few weeks and work diligently at meetings and on the list to develop recommendations for these particular issues.
The Method: Participants should each present one or more issues (with proposed solutions) which they believe are in scope for the Subgroup
· If you present more than one issue, please prioritize them (e.g., 1, 2, 3)
· Post the issue statement(s) to the list by 23:59 on 21 August for discussion at our meeting of 23 August.
· Issues should be very specific -- avoid open-ended, abstract or omnibus issues.
· All proposed issue statements should include one or more proposed solutions.
· Issue and solution descriptions should be succinct -- 12 standard lines maximum (each).
· Send your issue statement to the email list or put it on the Google sheet:
o Use a new email (not a reply), with the subject ISSUE: [name of issue].
o Google sheet is here: MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at "docs.google.com". Do not trust this website: MailScanner has detected definite fraud in the website at "docs.google.com". Do not trust this website: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zAMj3Oz8TEqbjauOyqt09Ef-1ada9TrC7i60...
§ If you put your issue on the Google sheet, notify the email list.
· If another participant proposes an issue you wanted to propose, simply post your support for that issue statement.
Thank you.
Greg
_______________________________________________ Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list Ws2-jurisdiction@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction