[CCWG-ACCT] RES: Jurisdiction Proposed Questions and Poll Results

[Seun Ojedeji]

Hello Kavouss,

I like to correct a word in my last mail. Where I used "don't" I meant to
use "do", I expected that my footer message would have saved me but
apparently it didn't (Considering your accusation of not being coherent
which I think wasn't appropriate). ;-)

Let me now make a second attempt to state my view (even though I think it
was clear from that previous mail), while also addressing your comments

1. Like Martin, I am also curious to know what problem exists to warrant
change of jurisdiction.

2. I expect that is what question 4 is trying to achieve. Hence I suggested
we push it and see what response comes from it. Even though I feel it's
going to cost us but I have come to realise it's better that it's done soon
enough than later. So we can at least have a coherent outcome of an MS
process to refer to in future when such subject comes up.

3. In this process I am participating as an individual and not as official
representative of any of the COs. While it's good to have camp(sides); i.e
people with similar views against the other, I don't think one can draw
that line clearly on this particular subject of discussion yet. However,
you will certainly have definite response soon but it will be based on the
individual issues raised about jurisdiction (which I expect has to be fact
based). Alberto has raised a few questions that I personally will also use
 to analyse the issues to be raised in response to question 4.

4. Thanks for raising the .Africa issue and yes I am significantly
concerned but there is a saying in my language "if we decide to burn a
snake by its length we may burn the house as well". So while I am also not
happy with how that event went so far, I don't think it's a reason to
change ICANN's incorporation. Definitely, it may be good to discuss
measures to put in place by ICANN to avoid getting to that level in future
and I look forward to that discussion (if it has not already happened
internally).

5. I remain proudly African, "an actual volunteer" definitely may not be as
committed as some others but without "governmental or business interest" in
this process.

Finally Kavouss, I do hope my view and stand on this subject is now clear
enough even though this is a little bit longer than my previous posts.

Merry Christmas and Happy new year!

Regards
Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On 29 Dec 2016 23:59, "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Seun,
You put many words together but that has nothing to do with Jurisdiction .
Just an incoherent approach .
Please clearly describe your idea which camp do you defend pls ?
No change ?
Or address  the  sensitive jurisdiction .
Can you tell me what the business of the US Court to decide on . afarica.:
You are African and must normally defend that people.
Why a UIS COURS is expected to decide on the interest of African People in
deciding whether it is the intestats of African to delegate the string to
Applicant 1 or applicant 2 .
Why not an African or international court should decide on the case.
Regards
Kavouss

2016-12-29 23:22 GMT+01:00 Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>:

> While I also share same question with Martin, I don't think it may be too
> early to give a definite response as you seem to have provided Milton as I
> guess that is what the question 4 seem to be all about. Unless we are
> already trying to process the questions before administering them.
>
> Hence I also look forward to what comes up as responses to that question
> even though I have feeling that it's gonna cost volunteer time and legal
> fees :)
>
> Cheers!
>
> Sent from my LG G4
> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>
> On 29 Dec 2016 23:03, "Mueller, Milton L" <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > I have read a number of the mails on this issue, but had not been
>> following the
>> > prior discussion.  Is there anything that I can read that does an
>> analysis of
>> > specific issues related to the jurisdiction and how these might be
>> addressed in
>> > different jurisdictions?
>>
>> No, there isn't. We are still debating whether and how to send out
>> questions asking people about this.
>> Join the fun on the jurisdiction subgroup list!
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20161230/254a4a07/attachment.html>