[Ws2-jurisdiction] WRITTEN ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS RAISED DURING THE CALL

[Kavouss Arasteh]

Dear Leon

Dear Greg

Thank you very much for your support for Greg and lack of even partial
support to my rights  as a participant to this Group to ask that written
answers be given to my questions raised pursuant to the list of questions
published by Greg

I do not understand what is wrong with asking such legitimates request i.e.

There were a list of questions

Some of them  were answered, some of them were not answered.

Those answered required to be supported by written answers to better
understand that

What is wrong deal Leon, Pls without getting in philosophical argument,
please clearly REPLY

What is wrong with that request ?

Why the group should approve that written answers given to my questions?

The majority of this group composed of those that do not want any change to
the existing situation while minority have serious difficulties with some
of the existing arrangements .

Dear Leon,

Do you believe that Greg is authorized by CCWG to stop this minority to
express their views. Too ask questions to ask answers to their question
verbally or in written form?

I do not understand you’re rational not to address this clear question

What is the problem that a written answer be given to questions of
substance when raised and demanded.

Why there is a need that the group should approve such a need

The need to answer raised by the people behind the questions and NOT THE
GROUP.

I would appropriate to receive answers.

By the way there were support to provide written answers to my questions
raised

Moreover, other questions raised in the attachment provided by Greg WERE
NOT EVEN DISCUSSED NOTR ANSWERED.

They must be answered.

By the way, there are a very small minority that categorically  disagree
with me irrespective the substance of the issue as they act with hostility

I certainly disapprove their unexpected behavior and DOT CARE OF THEIR
SYSTEMATIC OBJECTION .See support to Greg .

*In summary, Dear Leon, Dear Greg and Dear Sam;*

*I need written answers to my questions in addition to the transcript which
are not formal  ALL*

Best Regards

Kavouss

On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 7:24 AM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear Leon,
> Thank you very much for your support for Greg and lack of even partial
> support to my rights  as a participant to this Group to ask that written
> answers be given to my questions raised pursuant to the list of questions
> published by Greg
> I do not understand what is wrong with asking such légitimâtes req
>
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 6:49 AM, Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net>
> wrote:
>
>> It's hard to express this without sounding myself as if I'm being
>> slightly disrespectful, for which I apologise to Kavouss in advance.
>>
>> However it seems to me that all his shrill complaints  are simply
>> straight out of one of the chapters in Negotiation and International
>> Diplomacy 101 amd we shouldn't take them to heart, just like a pre-flop bet
>> in Texas Hold 'Em.
>>
>> As I've said before, I always feel it is a pleasure to watch how the game
>> is played in the majors.
>>
>> Nigel
>>
>>
>> PS: I do think that Greg is not being unfair, merely attempting to
>> promote collegiality, which is a noble aim. If we all considered the
>> question "how can we work together" rather than the "I want" then I believe
>> progress will be enhanced.
>>
>> >
>> > In particular, I want to publicly defend Greg against any claim that he
>> > is “not acting properly” or that his behavior is either “unprecedented”
>> > or “unacceptable” or “unfair.”
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
>> Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20170802/79a78932/attachment-0001.html>