[CCWG-ACCT] Communique - revised - any feedback by midnight Argentina time

[Chris LaHatte]

May I implore participants to continue to note the ICANN policy on polite discourse. It is important to have a strong and vigorous debate but we don't need to make personal attacks on each other. A polite note of disagreement should be sufficient, and has been frequently used. But if we start to attack individuals on list, this will distract us from the real tasks
Regards

Sent from my iPhone

> On 22/06/2015, at 8:53 am, Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
> 
> Colleagues
> 
> It seems to me worth recording, for "the record" that our colleague so
> frequently alludes to, some thoughts about the leadership of our group.
> Given the frequency and vituperative nature of the criticism emanating from
> one corner, I would not want silence in our discussions to in any way
> betoken agreement or assent.  When some future historian looks back on these
> proceedings they might mistake volume for accuracy and lack of contradiction
> for agreement.  That is most certainly not the case (at least not for me,
> and I suspect for many others).
> 
> I, for one, began this process with a modest amount of optimism that it
> could prove productive and a healthy dollop of skepticism that so unwieldy a
> process could be effectively managed.  In 35 years in government and the
> private sector I have seen any number of committees with a much narrower
> mandate and a much smaller membership flounder and fail.
> 
> We should all, therefore, reflect that our co-Chairs and rapporteurs have,
> through their efforts, managed to push us along this far and this
> effectively.  They have run an open and transparent process.  They have been
> inclusive.  They have moved the discussion along (perhaps too fast for some,
> but well within the bounds of reasonableness).  They have exhibited patience
> beyond measure (I, personally, would long ago have asked the chartering
> organization to recall its member).  And, to their very great credit, they
> have allowed the process to run without imposing their own views -- indeed,
> I would be hard pressed to state exactly what they might be -- an exercise
> in restraint that deserves praise.  
> 
> In short, by any objective measure our co-Chairs have done a fine job.  It
> has not been perfect, to be sure, but it has met every objective test of
> reasonableness that one can devise.  I reject utterly any suggestion of
> bias, animus, or dishonesty.  Those  are baseless puerile allegations that
> reflect more on the nature of the accuser, whose views will, I am sure, be
> seen in retrospect as baseless.  
> 
> Regards
> Paul
> 
> Paul Rosenzweig
> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
> O: +1 (202) 547-0660
> M: +1 (202) 329-9650
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
> Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Malcolm Hutty [mailto:malcolm at linx.net] 
> Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2015 4:59 PM
> To: Dr Eberhard W Lisse; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía
> Cc: List ccTLD Community; CCWG Accountability; Lisse Eberhard;
> <ccnso-members at icann.org>; cctldworld at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Communique - revised - any feedback by midnight
> Argentina time
> 
>> On 21/06/2015 21:26, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
>> Dear Co-Chairs,
>> 
>> Your Co-Chair is being quite economical with the truth.
> 
> Dear Dr Lisse,
> 
> I am getting quite tired of the repeated disrespect you are showing to our
> colleagues, and your unfair attempts to impugne their integrity.
> 
> The communique was proposed to the meeting and read out. Participants were
> invited to comment; there being no substantive comments, the communique was
> accepted. I don't know what more deliberation you could want. The handling
> was entirely proper and normal.
> 
> Your attacks on León are without a shred of justification, as were your
> previous attacks on our co-chairs. He deserves your apology, as do they; if
> you choose to withhold it, that reflects upon you, not on them.
> 
> Perhaps you might wish to reflect on how counter-productive your approach is
> to any effort to persuade colleagues to give their attention to your
> interventions, and the disservice you are doing your own cause thereby.
> 
> I am a proud proponent of the multistakeholder model. Many on this list are
> new to this model, and unused to the opportunity openness to all does give
> to those who wish to be rude and disruptive. I am embarrassed to think how
> they must feel when they see this spat, and the other occasions you have
> mistreated colleagues here.
> 
> I can only hope that our new colleagues can look past the behaviour of one
> individual and recognise the deep well of cooperation and goodwill that
> characterises the rest of our work. I hope they can still find it in
> themselves to agree with me that the great achievement of building a broad
> base of consensus in such a challenging area is worth even the inconvenience
> of suffering such rudeness.
> 
> I am sorry I have had to be so blunt, but remaining silent felt too much
> like complicity in an injustice.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Malcolm Hutty.
> 
> 
> -- 
>            Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523
>   Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog  London
> Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/
> 
>                 London Internet Exchange Ltd
>           21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY
> 
>         Company Registered in England No. 3137929
>       Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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