[Internal-cg] RFP - publishable draft?
Alissa Cooper
alissa at cooperw.in
Sat Aug 30 18:13:02 UTC 2014
Kavouss, all,
Attached and in dropbox are v14-alc-ka-alc and v14-alc-ka-alc-clean. These
contain the changes suggested by Kavouss and the “light-handed” compromise
suggested by Milton. As soon as we get the link to the centralized
information portal from Alice (which we need on page 1 of the RFP), we’ll
get the secretariat to post this version on the web site and make an
announcement.
On a separate note, it might make sense to spend a little time at the Sept 6
meeting talking about expectations for people’s response times to emails,
document reviews, etc. As I have already noted on this list, in my opinion
allowing at least 48 hours for responses during the week and 72 hours for
responses over a weekend is justified by the fact that we are all busy
people volunteering our time for this activity. In the case of this
particular document, the edits from Kavouss arrived in my inbox at 5:30am in
my time zone on Friday, while I was asleep. I woke up a few hours later,
answered some other emails (since I knew we wouldn’t have the portal link
ready before I got on my flights to Turkey) and left for the airport to
travel to Istanbul at 9:00am. I spent 24 of the 26 hours since then in
transit. If people expect faster response times, that is something we should
discuss as a group.
Thanks,
Alissa
On 8/30/14, 5:36 AM, "Kavouss Arasteh" <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Alissa,
> Please advise whether or not after several support to my proposal as
> contained/ mentioned in rev 2 that I did send you three days ago , v14 is now
> amended or not
> Regards
> Kavouss
>
>
> 2014-08-30 14:31 GMT+02:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>:
>> Dear All,
>> My rev 2 doc. relating to amenfment to v 14 of Draft RFP has not been taken
>> into account
>> I think it is not fair withourt examining a proposal to ignor it
>> kavouss
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
>> Date: 2014-08-30 14:30 GMT+02:00
>> Subject: Fwd: [Internal-cg] RFP - publishable draft?
>> To: Coordination Group <Internal-cg at icann.org>
>>
>>
>> Dear All,
>> My rev 2 doc. relating to amenfment to v 14 of Draft RFP has not been taken
>> into account
>> I think it is not fair withourt examining a proposal it should be ignored
>> Kavouss
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com>
>> Date: 2014-08-30 11:35 GMT+02:00
>> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] RFP - publishable draft?
>> To: Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> Off list:
>>
>> I've lost a bit of the thread...
>>
>> Which of your proposed edits s the one that hasn't been properly accounted
>> for?
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> On 8/30/2014 3:31 AM, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> Dear Alissa
>>>
>>> What Milton agreed was on consensus building process and not on RFP .
>>>
>>> What we are talking here is RFP. I have made some changes which are not of
>>> editorial nature but essential.
>>>
>>> There are inconsistencies in the v14 as I have indicated.
>>>
>>> I have sent that twice and I request to be considered before being published
>>> as draft .
>>>
>>> I am not in the little group nevertheless the amendment that I have proposed
>>> are essebntial.
>>>
>>> However, should every body agree that the draft should be published I have
>>> no problem provided that everybody understand that the amendments proposed
>>> by me are still valid and to be considered.
>>>
>>> I have informed in different manner
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Kavouss
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-08-30 9:29 GMT+02:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear All,
>>>>
>>>> Dear Alissa
>>>>
>>>> what Milton agreed was on consensus building process.
>>>>
>>>> What we are talking here is RFP. I have made some changes which are not of
>>>> editorial nature but essential.
>>>>
>>>> There are inconsistencies in the v14 as I have indicated.
>>>>
>>>> I have sent that twice and I request to be considered before being
>>>> published as draft .
>>>>
>>>> I am not in the little group nevertheless the amendment that I have
>>>> proposed are essebntial.
>>>>
>>>> However, should every body agree that the draft should be published I have
>>>> no problem provided that everybody understand that the amendments proposed
>>>> by me are still valid and to be considered.
>>>>
>>>> I have informed in different manner
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Kavouss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2014-08-30 7:06 GMT+02:00 Paul Wilson <pwilson at apnic.net>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I am keen to publish the draft, as a draft, soon please. It doesn’t need
>>>>> to be perfected before we do that.
>>>>>
>>>>> For the record I agree with Kavouss’ suggestions, as amended by Milton,
>>>>> and happy for these to be included
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul.
>>>>>
>>>>> ________________________________________________________________________
>>>>> Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC <dg at apnic.net>
>>>>> http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100
>>>>> <tel:%2B61%207%203858%203100>
>>>>>
>>>>> See you at APNIC 38! http://conference.apnic.net/38
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 30 Aug 2014, at 4:26 am, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> > Milton,
>>>>>> > Thank you again for yr analysis
>>>>>> > Yes I could make a consensus with your last suggestion
>>>>>> > Pls go ahead and I thank you for that.
>>>>>> > By the way do you know any ting about a book published in 70 s about
>>>>>> that group?
>>>>>> > tks and have a nice week-end ,if I do not hear from you
>>>>>> > Kavouss
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > 2014-08-29 20:12 GMT+02:00 Mohamed El Bashir <mbashir at mbash.net>:
>>>>>> > After reviewing Kavouss RFP updates, I prefer to keep the text " light
>>>>>> coordination role" and I am fine with the rest of the updates .
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > We suppose to finished and published the RFP yesterday, I propose move
>>>>>> ahead and publish the latest version as agreed before the IGF.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Kind Regards,
>>>>>> > Mohamed
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On 29 Aug 2014, at 19:47, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >> Dear Manal
>>>>>>> >> ,
>>>>>>> >> I am not pointing toward any one who made the suggestion that the
>>>>>>> adjective " Light " being added to the word or term " Coordination "
>>>>>>> >> I am just saysing that ICG tasks . interalia, is to coordinate the
>>>>>>> activities .
>>>>>>> >> This does not any thing to do with TOP down or button up process
>>>>>>> .Just it does not feet. It give the impression that the activities of
>>>>>>> ICCG on this matter is a light activitiwes and not a complete and
>>>>>>> in-depth
>>>>>>> >> Tks
>>>>>>> >> Kavouss
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> 2014-08-29 19:10 GMT+02:00 Manal Ismail <manal at tra.gov.eg>:
>>>>>>> >> This was not the intention of course .. I have inserted this clause
>>>>>>> “in order to help ICG maintain its light coordination role” as I thought
>>>>>>> 2 things would make it more convincing for non-operational parties to
>>>>>>> work through the operational communities processes:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> - to make sure the ICG does not have a top-down
>>>>>>> decision-making authority, and
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> - to make sure their contributions are considered early
>>>>>>> within the process, and directly discussed with the relevant party
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Just thought to clarify, but I’m flexible should colleagues feel it
>>>>>>> does not serve the purpose of the first bullet ..
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Kind Regards
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> --Manal
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org
>>>>>>> [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Kavouss Arasteh
>>>>>>> >> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 6:45 PM
>>>>>>> >> To: Milton L Mueller
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Cc: Coordination Group
>>>>>>> >> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] RFP - publishable draft?
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Dear Milton,
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Thank you very much for your kind response .You are among the most
>>>>>>> knowledgeable and competent as far as I understand the exchange of
>>>>>>> message.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Pls kindly note that the term LIGHT before coordination, weakenes
>>>>>>> our actions .It could be interpreted that the coordination actions that
>>>>>>> we undertake is not sufficiently serious as it is qualified by the
>>>>>>> adjective LIGHT.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Would it cause any difficulty that we delete that and just refer to
>>>>>>> coordination without any qualification.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Regards
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Kavouss
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> 2014-08-29 15:54 GMT+02:00 Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> My opinions regarding Kavouss’s proposed changes:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Would prefer to keep “light” in there.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> OK to remove the word “only” from the paragraph on Comments
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> OK to replace “direct” with “forward”
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> OK to replace “encourages” with “urges”
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Milton L Mueller
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Laura J and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Syracuse University School of Information Studies
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org
>>>>>>> [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Martin Boyle
>>>>>>> >> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 8:46 AM
>>>>>>> >> To: Kavouss Arasteh; Daniel Karrenberg
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Cc: Coordination Group
>>>>>>> >> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] RFP - publishable draft?
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Thanks Alissa for your work on this. I’m sure we could continue
>>>>>>> word-smithing this for a long time, and I’m happy to go.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Kavouss’s comment on light: I like the term as it reminds everyone
>>>>>>> that we are not planning to play the autocrats. But if non-native
>>>>>>> English speakers find the meaning obscure I’m ok without.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Cheers
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Martin
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org
>>>>>>> [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Kavouss Arasteh
>>>>>>> >> Sent: 29 August 2014 13:32
>>>>>>> >> To: Daniel Karrenberg
>>>>>>> >> Cc: Coordination Group
>>>>>>> >> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] RFP - publishable draft?
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Dear Alissa,
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Dear All,
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> I suggest some small amendments to make various parts of the text
>>>>>>> consistent with each other
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> See attachment
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Kavouss the l
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> 2014-08-29 13:37 GMT+02:00 Daniel Karrenberg
>>>>>>> <daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net>:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> On 28.08.14 23:36 , Alissa Cooper wrote:
>>>>>>>> >> > ...
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> > Are there any objections to publishing this as a draft (and
>>>>>>>> having the
>>>>>>>> >> > secretariat host it on our web site and make an announcement
>>>>>>>> about its
>>>>>>>> >> > existence) by Sept 1?
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> I support publishing this as a daft with Elise's corrections.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Daniel
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> >> Internal-cg mailing list
>>>>>>> >> Internal-cg at icann.org
>>>>>>> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> >> Internal-cg mailing list
>>>>>>> >> Internal-cg at icann.org
>>>>>>> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> > Internal-cg mailing list
>>>>>> > Internal-cg at icann.org
>>>>>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> > Internal-cg mailing list
>>>>>> > Internal-cg at icann.org
>>>>>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Internal-cg mailing list
>>>>> Internal-cg at icann.org
>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Internal-cg mailing list
>>> Internal-cg at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20140830/be988420/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IANA Transition RFP v14-alc-ka-alc-clean.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 150167 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20140830/be988420/IANATransitionRFPv14-alc-ka-alc-clean.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IANA Transition RFP v14-alc-ka-alc.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 151771 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20140830/be988420/IANATransitionRFPv14-alc-ka-alc.docx>
More information about the Internal-cg
mailing list