[Wp4] Discrete issue: Which bylaws formulation

[Matthew Shears]

Made some comments in the doc.  Meta level: the options for the CCWG 
should be only 3 or 4 - clearly proposed and reasoned.

Right now the last part looks very complicated and confused.   Much of 
it should probably go to the supporting doc.

Matthew

On 12/10/2015 18:13, Dr. Tatiana Tropina wrote:
> Thanks Greg
> Well, when the deadline is approaching, so any edit can be a "final 
> edit" :) (/Feci quod potui faciant meliora potentes/, in a way)
> I think the text already looked ok last time I checked it after the 
> changes proposed by Niels a couple of days ago, however, I think there 
> is a bit of confusion at the end about the bracketed language proposed 
> for consideration. There are two options with "bracketed language" in 
> the last part (I think we need to be crystal clear concerning what is 
> actually forwarded to the larger group - I assume, it's a short 
> version) + I think there should be a bit of more details about the 
> poll/results. May be I am mistaken and can't remember exact wording, 
> but I can't access the document in a "normal way" from my mobile phone 
> - can't add the comments, etc. so in fact I can't correct anything.  I 
> don't know what kind of edits you are going to make - if the issues I 
> mentioned above won't be addressed, I can probably live with that...
> Again, thanks a lot.
> Best
> Tanya
>
> On 12/10/15 17:49, Greg Shatan wrote:
>> I hesitate to call it a "final edit" but I can propose some edits 
>> this afternoon, after lunch (NY time), and others can see how that looks.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Dr. Tatiana Tropina 
>> <t.tropina at mpicc.de <mailto:t.tropina at mpicc.de>> wrote:
>>
>>     +1 to Greg
>>
>>     By the way, the deadline is today, right? I can't edit the
>>     document because I am on holiday; have very limited time & access
>>     to Internet. Is there anyone who is going to make final edits?
>>
>>     best,
>>     Tatiana
>>
>>     On 12/10/15 16:57, Greg Shatan wrote:
>>>     I think that there has been broad opposition to "cherry-picking"
>>>     human rights.  I would apply this to the Ruggie principles as well.
>>>
>>>     Greg
>>>
>>>     On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Dr Eberhard W Lisse
>>>     <el at lisse.na> wrote:
>>>
>>>         Nigel overlooked the reference to my profession, when we say
>>>         "Look at"
>>>         it usually involves scalpels :-)-O
>>>
>>>         So, how do the Ruggie principles look like without the subset?
>>>
>>>         el
>>>
>>>
>>>         On 2015-10-12 13:37, Nigel Roberts wrote:
>>>         > Eberhard is misdirecting himself. We don't want to look at
>>>         THAT subset.
>>>         >
>>>         > We should be looking at (in set theoretical terms) the
>>>         relative
>>>         > complement subset.
>>>         >
>>>         >
>>>         >
>>>         > N.
>>>         >
>>>         >
>>>         >
>>>         >
>>>         > On 12/10/15 12:27, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
>>>         >> Paul,
>>>         >>
>>>         >> I was not going to die in a ditch about the Ruggie
>>>         principles, but why
>>>         >> don't we look at your subset?
>>>         >>
>>>         >> el
>>>         >>
>>>         >> On 2015-10-11 23:03, Paul Twomey wrote:
>>>         >>> Nigel
>>>         >>>
>>>         >>> I am of a similar view as Tatiana's below.
>>>         >>>
>>>         >>> My stated concern has always been with some subset
>>>         sections of the
>>>         >>> Ruggie principles.  Not necessarily with UDHR.
>>>         >>>
>>>         >>> Paul
>>>         >> [...]
>>>         >>
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse  \        / Obstetrician &
>>>         Gynaecologist (Saar)
>>>         el at lisse.NA <mailto:el at lisse.NA>     / *     |   Telephone:
>>>         +264 81 124 6733 <tel:%2B264%2081%20124%206733> (cell)
>>>         PO Box 8421             \     /
>>>         Bachbrecht, Namibia     ;____/
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Wp4 mailing list
>>>         Wp4 at icann.org <mailto:Wp4 at icann.org>
>>>         https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>     Wp4 mailing list
>>>     Wp4 at icann.org <mailto:Wp4 at icann.org>
>>>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Wp4 mailing list
>>     Wp4 at icann.org <mailto:Wp4 at icann.org>
>>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wp4 mailing list
> Wp4 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp4

-- 

Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology
mshears at cdt.org
+ 44 771 247 2987



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp4/attachments/20151012/9856fe33/attachment.html>