<div dir="ltr"><div>Seun,</div><div>Position of some people from the very begining was hard and inflexible</div><div>They are not looking for any compromise .Tha does not work</div><div>Some people defending particular external entity ( outside CCWG ) THAT IS NOT FAIR EITHER.</div><div>we v can not make evry body happy but we could try to make evrybody equally happay or equally unhappy.</div><div>CONSTANT OBJECTION TO ONE PARTICULAR AC seems unfair</div><div>Constant and continued objection to a gien issue is simple but proposing a soltion is difficult and requires skills MULTICULTURALISM AND SPIRIT OF understanding other's problem </div><div>Kavouss </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-01-29 23:02 GMT+01:00 Seun Ojedeji <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir="ltr">So this does not generate another long thread and so that things are not logged out of context. I was at the last meeting (though audio only), I did not observe any "people painting" but i heard people repeating their points as much as possible while the co-chairs tried as much as possible to maintain focus of the discussion to maximise time.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Cheers!</p>
<div class="gmail_quote"><div><div class="h5">On 29 Jan 2016 8:06 p.m., "Robin Gross" <<a href="mailto:robin@ipjustice.org" target="_blank">robin@ipjustice.org</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid"><div><div class="h5"><div style="-ms-word-wrap: break-word;"><div>I was rather disappointed by the approach taken in yesterday’s meeting to address concerns about the excessive and improperly balanced power being given to GAC in this “accountability” process.</div><div><br></div><div>Rather than trying to paint <i><b>people</b></i> as unsympathetic or “anti-government”, it is better to address the <b><i>arguments </i></b>presented by those who are uncomfortable with this level of control being handed to GAC through this process. There are legitimate concerns about over-empowering one segment relative the existing structure and balance among SO-ACs, and those concerns should be addressed on their merit, without the need to resort to name-calling. </div><div><br></div><div>Please don’t make this a debate about people who hold concerns, but rather stick to the substantive issues.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Robin</div></div><br></div></div><span>_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
<br></span></blockquote></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>