[CCWG-ACCT] Minority statement review process (Was Re: Minority Statements)

[Thomas Rickert]

Dear Seun,
we will make no distinction between minority statements from members or from participants. 

Providing the opportunity to individuals that are dissatisfied with our results as a whole or in part will help the community assess our work. 

The statements are primarily to inform the community, but they may also influence individuals in our group to change their mind and support another solution. 

There is no plan by the co-chairs to respond to individual statement. Should there be the wish by individuals to comment on minority statements, we recommend you do this via a public comment. 

Kind regards,
Thomas


---
rickert.net


> Am 01.08.2015 um 16:08 schrieb Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>:
> 
> That's fine, I understand participants may not write minority statements directly based on the charter. However participants who have representatives could write and have it's member representative forward accordingly (that's what I meant by me writing).
> I will wait for the Co-Chairs to respond to my question of whether there is anything else they will do on minority statements received during public comments period other than adding it to the report. The charter did not specify that.
> 
> Regards
> 
>> On 1 Aug 2015 2:01 pm, "Dr Eberhard W Lisse" <el at lisse.na> wrote:
>> Members and Participants are treated differently by the Charter.
>> 
>> el
>> 
>> -- 
>> Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 6
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 1, 2015, at 13:36, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear Co-Chairs,
>>> 
>>> I understand that minority statements are allowed. However may I know how the group intend to respond to those statements. Will they be addressed along side comments received from public comment after the closure of the current PC? Or they will not be addressed but included as part of the annexes in the final documents?
>>> 
>>> I am asking because I personally find a few sections of Edward's minority statements unacceptable, which could actually trigger a minority statement from me as well depending on how this CCWG intends to handle minority statements.
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> 
>>>> On 1 Aug 2015 1:11 pm, "Edward Morris" <egmorris1 at toast.net> wrote:
>>>> About twenty minutes ago I submitted directly to the Chairs, per the instructions given to us by Thomas in his email of 29 July, two minority statements for (hopefully) inclusion in the report about to be released for public comment. I had not intended to file any minority statement but, upon reflection, two aspects of our proposal caused me concern. 
>>>>  
>>>> The statements are attached here for community inspection and review.
>>>>  
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>  
>>>> Edward Morris
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150801/2d80bf1e/attachment.html>