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

[parminder]

On Wednesday 02 August 2017 09:01 PM, McAuley, David via
Ws2-jurisdiction wrote:
>
> Thank you, Leon,
>
>  
>
> This subgroup is handling perhaps the most sensitive issue in Work
> Stream Two – and we are now at the difficult time near the end of
> deliberations if we are to get our report out on schedule.
>
>  
>
> Greg has, as rapporteur, what is basically a near-impossible job and
> he has handled it willingly and essentially by himself – and, in my
> personal opinion, fairly.
>
>  
>
> I thought Sam’s presentation yesterday was very informative and it is
> all on record – her presentation as well as her extemporaneous answers
> to questions.   Again, in my personal opinion, this is sufficient record.
>

Are you against being provided written responses (with whatever
disclaimer) against each question asked? What is the point is asking for
and listing a set of questions from the sub group if they do not get
responses

parminder

 
>
>  
>
> I disagree with the criticisms and voice my support for Greg’s
> leadership. I hope and trust that we can all remain constructively
> engaged as we do the heavy-lifting to bring this important work to
> conclusion.
>
>  
>
> Best regards,
>
> David
>
>  
>
> David McAuley
>
> Sr International Policy & Business Development Manager
>
> Verisign Inc.
>
> 703-948-4154
>
>  
>
> *From:* ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *León Felipe
> Sánchez Ambía
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 01, 2017 6:13 PM
> *To:* Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] WRITTEN ANSWERS TO THE
> QUESTIONS RAISED DURING THE CALL
>
>  
>
> Dear all,
>
>  
>
> Let me, once again, call everyone to remain respectful and collegiate
> as our group has characterized to be since the beginning.
>
>  
>
> We are all volunteers and we all deserve respect to the work we do and
> to our points of view. 
>
>  
>
> I understand there might be frustration when our views do not gain
> traction at a subgroup level but we need to keep our energy focused on
> building solutions and in line with our working methods. That is, if a
> subgroup considers that a given request is relevant to the work the
> subgroup is carrying then the subgroup may request follow up or action
> on the item. If the subgroup considers a given topic or request does
> not seem to add to the subgroups work at that particular point in
> time, then the subgroup members are encouraged to focus their energy
> in continue to build consensus on the topics being discussed.
>
>  
>
> That doesn’t rule out, of course, any views or requests but it does
> subject said views or requests to the decision making process of each
> subgroup or the plenary as the case may be.
>
>  
>
> My respect and recognition to all members and participants of the
> different subgroups. Let us continue in good spirit the work that we
> have been trusted with.
>
>  
>
> Kind regards,
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> León
>
>  
>
>     El 01/08/2017, a las 16:35, Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
>     <mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>> escribió:
>
>      
>
>     Greg
>
>     What do you mean by sub group decides 
>
>     You  are blocking all my roquets
>
>     I raised questions they were answered incomplete or not answered
>     at all
>
>     This  us my  right to ask written answer and gas nothing to do
>     with the approval if the group    
>
>     I am tired of thus sort of 
>
>     blacking.
>
>     You are not acting properly and I formally register complaint for
>     such unfair tressent.
>
>     Your behaviour is not acceptable and categorically rejected
>
>     I do not agree that you treat a member of the group so aggressively
>
>     You have interrupted me with an unprecedented behaviour
>
>     Pls explain.
>
>     You act negatively to all my proposal
>
>     You di not want to find a solution for these problems
>
>     You just wasting our time 
>
>     We disagree with your working method.
>
>     Either behave or .....
>
>     Reply. Explain
>
>     There are motivation behind your
>
>      unfair actions
>
>     Kavouss
>
>      
>
>      
>
>      
>
>      
>
>         
>
>       
>
>
>
>     Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>     On 1 Aug 2017, at 21:55, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com
>     <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         Kavouss, 
>
>          
>
>         Kindly direct your request to the Subgroup, and not to Sam. 
>         This is a matter for the Subgroup to consider, rather than any
>         individual participant.  The Subgroup can take up your request
>         and decide whether to ask for written responses to questions
>         (and if so, which questions).  Thank you.
>
>          
>
>         Best regards,
>
>          
>
>         Greg
>
>          
>
>         On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Kavouss Arasteh
>         <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>>
>         wrote:
>
>             Dear Sam, With tks to your presentation, pls kindly note
>             that I nned written answers to the questions raised before
>             the meeting and those during the meeing either as
>             intervention or in the chat.
>
>             Regards
>
>             Kavouss
>
>          
>
>  
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170803/e72394fa/attachment.html>