[CCWG-ACCT] proposed F2F meeting of CCWG

[Dr Eberhard W Lisse]

Dear Co-Chairs,

besides that Tijani and (more so) I have in the past expressed concern about the pace, and hence the quality of our deliberations previously, I am now in the enjoyable position of being able to inquire through the Co-Chairs, when Tijani will start figuring out the rationale behind these "decisions" ostensibly made by the Co-Chairs.


greetings, el
-- 
Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini

> On May 28, 2015, at 21:42, Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa at fmai.org.tn> wrote:
> 
> Will it be productive with half of the members??????
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> Tijani BEN JEMAA
> [...]
p
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] De la part de
> Kavouss Arasteh
> Envoyé : jeudi 28 mai 2015 15:37
> À : Dr Eberhard W Lisse
> Cc : Lisse Eberhard; Accountability Cross Community
> Objet : Re: [CCWG-ACCT] proposed F2F meeting of CCWG
> 
> Dear Co-Chair
> We need  to have at least half if the members plus Liaisons
> Regards
> Kavouss
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 28 May 2015, at 12:03, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el at lisse.NA> wrote:
>> 
>> Adam,
>> 
>> I suggest Windhoek :-)-O but if it has to be Europe, Amsterdam,
>> London, Brussels and Paris in that order would come to mind.
>> 
>> 
>> The proposed week is much too early and this is caused by the
>> failing methodology of the Co-Chairs subordinating quality of work
>> to their self imposed, absolutely unnecessary deadline.
>> 
>> So I object.
>> 
>> But as I will be ignored as usual, can we have it we at least have
>> it a week later and arrange it with the arrival date on Sunday so
>> one can depart Tuesday evening?
>> 
>> The below proposed schedule will destroy a full week of work (for
>> those of us who have to work for a living).
>> 
>> el
>> 
>>> On 2015-05-28 10:25 , Adam Peake wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> 
>>> The co-chairs suggest we hold a face-to-face meeting to prepare
>>> the second public comment proposal.  The expected launch of the
>>> second public comment is 31 July (for 40 days).  We suggest the
>>> face-to-face meeting should be held with the target arrival date
>>> 20 July, meeting 21-22 July.
>>> 
>>> This is close to the Buenos Aires meeting, more travel will be a
>>> significant commitment for you all, but this face-to-face is felt
>>> necessary to prepare the next public comment period.
>>> 
>>> Location: suggest a European hub city.  We would prefer diversity
>>> of a new location, but given the short time available to make the
>>> necessary reservations, and to make travel as easy as possible for
>>> the majority of CCWG colleagues, a location in Europe seems the
>>> best option at this time.
>>> 
>>> Usual travel support will be provided for CCWG appointed members
>>> and liaisons.
>>> 
>>> Remote access will be available for those who cannot attend.
>>> 
>>> Apologies, the recommended dates overlap with IETF#93, July 19-24,
>>> 2015.
>>> 
>>> Thank you.
>>> 
>>> Adam

>>> [...]