[CCWG-ACCT] Further Objection to the Methodology

[Dr Eberhard W Lisse]

Dear Co-Chairs Thomas and Matheiu,

Can you please explain to you Co-Chair that the very point was that
I need time to study the document and that I objected and still
object against dealing with this in a cursory manner.

However, since he asked, I'll write under correction, that I don't
think ccTLDs can be (in) a member organization unless all 253 bind
themselves to this.

I have asked NUMEROUS times, to no avail, that we find out what the
legal foundation of the USG's claim to the root/IANA function is.
And we need to establish how this relates to each ccTLD. We may not
be able to do this for all 253 (or how many they are) but there are
a few broad categories we can classify them in.

For example (and just off the cuff and decidedly incomplete)

Before RFC1951 (1994)
before ICANN
During ICANN
IDN ccTLDs

But, again, I object to being put under pressure of dealing with a
complex matter and document in a superficial manner.

greetings, el


On 2015-04-15 04:16 , León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
> Dear Eberhard,
> 
> Thanks for your comments.
> 
> Which content issues did you identify in the document?  I will be
> happy to discuss and take back to the legal sub-team and the
> lawyers.
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> 
> León
> 
>> El 14/04/2015, a las 7:42, Dr Eberhard Lisse <el at lisse.NA> escribió:
>>
>> Dear Co-Charis,
>>
>> this is not directed against an individual or a group of individuals
>> (inside the CCWG).
>>
>> I can not participate in a meaningful deliberation on this unless I
>> have time to properly review this document, not just being fed a
>> large number of busy slides.
>>
>> Never mind "decision".
>>
>> There are some content issues (for example with regards to
>> membership as far as ccTLDs are concerned) which flashed by.
>>
>> This the wrong way of dealing with this, and I renew my objection for
>> the record.
>>
>> el
>>
>> On 2015-04-14 13:29, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
>>> Dear Eberhard,
>>>
>>> The slides were sent to everyone as soon as we got them.
>>>
>>> I remind you that no substantial decision is made on any single
>>> call so you don’t have to worry on having to decide on anything
>>> on this call.  We make second readings on substantial issues.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>>
>>> León
>>>
>>>> El 14/04/2015, a las 7:25, Dr Eberhard Lisse <el at lisse.NA>
>>>> escribió:
>>>>
>>>> Dear Co-Chairs,
>>>>
>>>> Why have the slides of the law firm not been sent to us early
>>>> enough to consider them, prior to being presented and discussed?
>>>> Never mind decision making.
>>>>
>>>> I object to this.
>>>>
>>>> el
>>>> -- 
>>>> Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse  \        / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar)
>>>> el at lisse.NA            / *     |   Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
>>>> PO Box 8421             \     /
>>>> Bachbrecht, Namibia     ;____/
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>> -- 
>> Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse  \        / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar)
>> el at lisse.NA            / *     |   Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
>> PO Box 8421             \     /
>> Bachbrecht, Namibia     ;____/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

-- 
Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse  \        / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar)
el at lisse.NA            / *     |   Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
PO Box 8421             \     /
Bachbrecht, Namibia     ;____/