<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Dear all,</p>
<p>We have reached a consensus in our subgroup on our report to the
plenary, with a minority opinion.</p>
I would prefer if we could come to a full consensus, without a
minority opinion, but currently I do not see how to achieve that,
but I also do not want to stop searching for it. <br>
<br>
If the subgroup believes there is space to find a consensus position
between the 'more Ruggie' and the 'no more Ruggie' camp I would be
more than willing to facilitate it. <br>
<br>
Such a full consensus position would most probably look like: a
little bit more Ruggie. If this is something we would like to
further seek out, I am more than happy to help setup calls, drafting
teams, or anything else that might make a full consensus possible.
If we do not think we can come to such a solution, we will need to
continue discussion it in the plenary.<br>
<br>
I am very curious to hear your ideas and suggestions. <br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Niels <br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/01/2017 09:40 PM, Greg Shatan
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CA+aOHUTJ0Ob-JM6eYm2LSjNhB0sBam6Hoq3a1RzDPkO95AGtEQ@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">All.</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I don't think we have
"a subgroup decision that was not accepted at the plenary
level." I've gone back to the Transcript and notes to confirm
my recollection. </div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">It's clear that the
Ombudsman group is in that situation. It was pretty clear
that an aspect of their report was not getting sufficient
support from the Plenary to move beyond it. So they were told
to go back and try again. </div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">That is not where we
stand. There was no Plenary decision at all. Nor was there a
"knotty issue" brought to the plenary (although one could say
that any issue that inspires a "dissent" is somewhat knotty).
There was a request that the Plenary consider resolving an
issue differently from the way that the Subgroup did. </div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Here's the relevant
portion of the transcript (slightly cleaned up by listening to
the recording):</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:justify;line-height:150%"><span
style="font-size:12pt;line-height:150%;font-family:"Source
Sans Pro"">>>
THOMAS RICKERT: Okay. Thanks very much. Now, it appears
like the, which our sub team
has submitted a report and that there were some
last-minute changes which were controversial
in the sub team itself. I think that
given this controversy the sub team needs to take this
back and discuss this, so
that we get a report to the plenary which has the status
of being confirmed by
the sub team. I think it was interesting
though to get some views but I guess it clearly shows that
the plenary doesn't
have sufficient information to take a decision today.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:justify;line-height:150%"><span
style="font-size:12pt;line-height:150%;font-family:"Source
Sans Pro"">We have
one minute left in this call. So I'm
afraid that we need to end this discussion for today.
There will be another plenary on the
11th. And let me now hand over to my
fellow co chair Jordan for closing remarks and
adjournment.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:justify;line-height:150%"><span
style="font-size:12pt;line-height:150%;font-family:"Source
Sans Pro"">>>
JORDAN CARTER: Thanks Thomas. Niels is that you?<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:justify;line-height:150%"><span
style="font-size:12pt;line-height:150%;font-family:"Source
Sans Pro"">>>
NIELS TEN OEVER: I’m sorry, Thomas, I
have to ask can we please schedule this for next plenary
and not just point
this back to the subgroup. I think in
the subgroup we have managed to come to a consensus with
the minority
statement. I think if we want to get rid
of the minority statement I think we would do it, have a
discussion in the
plenary not point it back to the subgroup because I think
in the subgroup I'm
not sure how much we can move it and we would really like
to have more time to
discuss this in the plenary if possible.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:justify;line-height:150%"><span
style="font-size:12pt;line-height:150%;font-family:"Source
Sans Pro"">>>
JORDAN CARTER: We will definitely have
this topic on the agenda for the next plenary.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:justify;line-height:150%"><span
style="font-size:12pt;line-height:150%;font-family:"Source
Sans Pro"">Thomas,
do you want to add anything more to that?<span></span></span></p>
<span
style="font-size:12pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Source
Sans Pro"">>>
THOMAS RICKERT: No I just wanted to
confirm we’re going to discuss it at the next meeting and if
you as rapporteur
inform us that the report is ready to be debated and that is
by the plenary, so
be it. Fine. Over to you, Jordan.</span><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span
style="font-size:12pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Source
Sans Pro""><br>
</span></div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I'll leave it to our
rapporteur to confirm exactly where we stand, but I did want
to clarify that we are not a position where the Plenary spoke
and told us to try again. We ran out of time before the
Plenary could consider the report before them (without Jorge's
suggestion), which could have resulted in (a) accepting the
report as is, (b) sending the report back to the subgroup to
try again, or (c) a Plenary decision to revise the report in
some fashion. </div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I think it's relevant
that Jorge's suggested text was sent to the Plenary list and
not to the Subgroup. and that the Plenary was asked to
consider it. So, it seems to me that Thomas's summary of
where things stand does not quite capture it correctly -- it
would be more accurate to say that "last minute changes were
submitted to the Plenary which were controversial to members
of the Subgroup." (Obviously, not controversial to <u>all</u> members
of the Subgroup.)</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Procedurally, that may
well dictate that this should stay at the Plenary level. The
procedural ping-pong in the Plenary doesn't leave it clear
where CCWG and Subgroup leadership think it should be (with
Thomas seeming to bounce this back to the Subgroup and Niels
stating that it would be better dealt with in the Plenary,
with the end result only that it will be on the agenda of the
next Plenary).</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Pragmatically, the
Plenary discussion will probably be better served if the
Subgroup hashes this out one more time, even if that's not
procedurally correct. If there is a proposal that would
eliminate the need for the current dissent, without losing
significant support from those in the current consensus, that
would be great. If there is no such proposal, then, as Thomas
said, "so be it."</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg</div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 12:56 PM, avri
doria <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:avri@apc.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">avri@apc.org</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
<span class="gmail-"><br>
On 29-Sep-17 19:59, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:<br>
> So what was everyone on the plenary CCWG-<br>
> ACCT call yesterday referring to when they objected
to the "compromise text" that was submitted to the CCWG
list without having gone through the usual procedures in
the subgroup?<br>
<br>
</span>It seems to me that once an issue is described as
having no consensus in<br>
a subgroup and there is a declaration that none is
reachable, the next<br>
step is to take the question to the plenary for plenary
discussion.<br>
Seems to me this is especially the case when a minority
view is attached<br>
to a proposed recommendation.<br>
<br>
This is not the first time a knotty issue has been brought
to the<br>
plenary or the first time a subgroup was given the
opportunity to<br>
reconsider a subgroup decision that was not accepted at
the plenary level.<br>
<span class="gmail-HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
avri<br>
</font></span>
<div class="gmail-HOEnZb">
<div class="gmail-h5"><br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Ws2-hr mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ws2-hr@icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">Ws2-hr@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/ws2-hr</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Ws2-hr mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Ws2-hr@icann.org">Ws2-hr@icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-hr</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>