[CCWG-ACCT] Minority statements inclusion in report

[Dr Eberhard W Lisse]

Dear Co-Chairs,

I have stated right from the beginning that I say what I mean and I
mean what I say.  And I do what I think is right.


I think we have been through this already. TWICE. But then...

I seem to recall the Chair of ccNSP Council (who does read in copy)
having stated when he was asked (I think by the representative of
the German Internet industry's interests) whether I represent the
views of the ccNSO, that the diversity of the ccNSO is reflected in
the appointment of its members to the CCWG.

Never mind that, where appropriate, I have INDEED solicited AND
communicated the views and concerns of individuals in the
organization that appointed me.

To no avail.  Or rather to strong exceptions.  Or whatever.


I would not ask whether the representative of the EU's input
reflects the opinion of the EU nor even the GAC, but I need to point
out that the GAC representatives have been distinctly lagging, if
not lacking, in communicating the views and concerns of individuals
in the organization that appointed them.

Never mind that several, and I wish to single out the representative
of Brazil here in particular, have been pushing their governments'
agenda in the CCWG.

With which I have absolutely no issue, per se, by the way, but I do
wonder whether what is good for the goose should not also be good
for the gander...

And I am not even talking about the Co-Chairs.

I also wish to thank the representative of the EU for creating the
opportunity for me to find out the meaning of the word 'fortiori"
and to find out that its use as an adjective is to be resisted.

el

On 2015-11-30 10:53, Megan.Richards at ec.europa.eu wrote:
> So far as I can see the Charter indicates that members should
> solicit the views of the organisations that appointed them:
[...]

> So a fortiori minority opinions should be from members
> representing a chartering organisation and I suppose any
> participants opinions can be expressed as their own opinion but
> should be distinguished from those of members.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Dr Eberhard W Lisse
> *Sent:* Monday, November 30, 2015 9:00 AM
> *To:* CCWG Accountability
> *Cc:* Lisse Eberhard
> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Minority statements inclusion in report
>
>
>
> So now a participant, from ALAC, which changes his mind for him as
> the wind blows, wants to change the charter after the fact.
>
>
>
> The charter could not be clearer on this.
>
>
>
> I support Robin Gross's objection, endorse her minority opinion,
> object myself and shall forward a minority opinion in due course.
>
>
>
> And for the record I did not, do not and will not consult with the
> ccNSO on my position.  I don't have to.
>
>
>
> And, for the record, I did inform the chair of ccNSO Council
> earlier, in terms of the charter, about being marginalized.
>
>
>
> The substance of which seeming to be getting traction in the US
> Appeals Court case.
>
>
>
> el
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
>
>
> On 30 Nov 2015, at 06:51, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com
> <mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hello,
>
>     I believe this particular report is quite critical and
>     minority statement should be treated with adequate clarity and
>     care.  It should be clear if minority statements are written
>     on behalf of the originating chartering organisation (i.e
>     whether the CO has been consulted before such submission is
>     made).  The charter was not clear about this but I believe
>     this should be the ideal thing to do at this stage.  If member
>     are the ones allowed to write minority reports (although it's
>     not explicitly stated in the charter) then such exercise
>     should involve coordination with the originating chartering
>     organisation.  Or maybe a declaimer be added in minority
>     annexes that the views are those of the author and not of the
>     Chartering organisation.
>
>     There may also be possibility that some minority statements
>     could be resolved or perhaps further discussed to provide
>     further clarity that convinces the author not to proceed
>     further, this would imply having them come in early enough
>     before finalising the report.
>
>     Regards
>     Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
>     Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>
[...]

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