[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] Re: notes and action items from the CCWG Auction Proceeds meeting on Wed, 31 July 2019 (14 UTC).

Maureen Hilyard maureen.hilyard at gmail.com
Tue Aug 6 05:43:13 UTC 2019

Hi John

My fault for assuming everyone had been at the same meeting. Although not
actually stated we had been talking about the volunteers from the various
community groups on the CCWG. And Alan's suggestion that community
volunteers would not have the same commitment as paid experts. Somehow
that's understandable.. but is it right?

On Mon, 5 Aug 2019, 7:34 PM John R. Levine, <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:

> > I think that in the discussion we had, Alan felt that a third party might
> > be more appropriate for the independent panel because volunteers  such as
> > those who volunteered for the AP CCWG work for example have demonstrated
> a
> > tendency to be unreliable ...
> Um, wait.  I'm pretty sure that "volunteer" and "community member" are not
> synonyms.
> Regards,
> John Levine, johnl at iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for
> Dummies",
> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20190805/2eba6d5d/attachment.html>

More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list