Re: [lac-discuss-en] FW: VOTE ANNOUNCEMENT: ALAC Statement on the Draft Report: Review of the Generic Names Supporting Organization

To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@xxxxxxx>, "lac-discuss-en@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lac-discuss-en@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] FW: VOTE ANNOUNCEMENT: ALAC Statement on the Draft Report: Review of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
From: "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" <apisan@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 21:58:19 +0000

Olivier,

I'm speaking about the ALAC draft.

But look, something good has happened: at least one ALAC member has spoken out
explaining her position. Transparency welcome.

Yours,

Alejandro Pisanty

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
Facultad de Química UNAM
Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico

+52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD

+525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475
Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn,
http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

________________________________
Desde: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond [ocl@xxxxxxx]
Enviado el: lunes, 03 de agosto de 2015 16:53
Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; lac-discuss-en@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
CC: Vanda Scartezini
Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-en] FW: VOTE ANNOUNCEMENT: ALAC Statement on the Draft
Report: Review of the Generic Names Supporting Organization

Dear Alejandro,

thanks for your kind note. Which draft are you speaking about? The Westlake
draft or the ALAC Statement draft?
Kindest regards,

Olivier

On 03/08/2015 20:44, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote:
Olivier,

I find the draft lacking in understanding the necessary tensions in the
non-commercial space, and in not making an analysis of the effects of
increasing structural complexity on the GNSO in general.

Alejandro Pisanty

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
Facultad de Química UNAM
Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico

+52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD

________________________________
Desde:
lac-discuss-en-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:lac-discuss-en-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

[lac-discuss-en-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:lac-discuss-en-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]
en nombre de Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond [ocl@xxxxxxx<mailto:ocl@xxxxxxx>]
Enviado el: lunes, 03 de agosto de 2015 08:43
Hasta:
lac-discuss-en@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:lac-discuss-en@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
CC: Vanda Scartezini
Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-en] FW: VOTE ANNOUNCEMENT: ALAC Statement on the Draft
Report: Review of the Generic Names Supporting Organization

Hello all,

let me make this quite clear from the outset: ALAC members are asked to vote on
the Statement, not on the GNSO Review Report. The ALAC Statement mentions the
points it agrees with in the GNSO Review report. It mentions the points it does
not agree with and is pretty strong on criticising the Consultants about the
fact it completely missed the opportunity to evaluate the GNSO Structure. The
ALAC response is pretty clear about that.
The call for comments was made on 15 July. The only ALAC member from LAC that
commented was Vanda and her views were taken into account. The only other
LACRALO member that commented was Carlton Samuels and his views were also taken
into account.

In formulating the ALAC response, I unfortunately received no other input from
LACRALO members, despite requests for feedback.

Kind regards,

Olivier

On 03/08/2015 15:18, <mailto:cveraq@xxxxxxxxx>
cveraq@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:cveraq@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]

Subject: Re: FW: VOTE ANNOUNCEMENT: ALAC Statement on the Draft Report: Review
of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
From: cveraq@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:cveraq@xxxxxxxxx>

Vanda: if you say &quot;I intend to vote in Please though I personally
believe, and HAD Such statement made, That the review itself was really weak
and did not touch Relevant several points.&quot;

It sounds contradictory and the vote should be against?

Carlos Vera Quintana
0988141143
Sguemecveraq

El 2/8/2015, a las 19:39, Alejandro Pisanty
<apisanty@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:apisanty@xxxxxxxxx> escribió:

I intend to vote in favor though I personally believe, and had made such
statement, that the review itself was really weak and did not touch several
relevant points.

[[--Original text (es)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/6e497ab67c.html
--]]

_______________________________________________