[CCWG-ACCT] Confusion and my position

Greg Shatan gregshatanipc at gmail.com
Tue Feb 23 17:27:34 UTC 2016

I've just done a "distribution analysis" (not as grand as it sounds) of the
4 polls, and I tend to disagree with Andrew's hardening theory (or at
least, I don't agree completely).

I've posted this in the thread where the poll results were announced.  You
will see that 10 of the 11 participating structures had members who
supported removing clause (2).  That seems like a coming together in this
particular instance.

Aside from the poll, I did see some unfortunate hardening of positions and
hardening of divisions.  I would like to encourage the members and
participants to support the final result of our work whatever it may be.

I would also like to encourage the Members to reconsider submitting
Minority Statements.  Unified support will speak volumes as this
progresses.  There are parts of this final Proposal I am not happy with.
There are battles that were fought and lost, and consensus-building
compromises that make me queasy; I believe other members of my stakeholder
structure (IPC) would tend to agree.  If I were so inclined (and if I were
a Member or my structure had a Member able to speak for my structure alone)
I could stand our ground (or lick our wounds) in a Minority Statement.
Philosophically, that's not my style.  The corollary to "Nothing's agreed
until everything's agreed" is "Once everything's agreed, everything's
agreed."  We have to decide which battles to pick and which battles to win,
and which exchanges of views to categorize as battles in the first place.
In this case, I think the battles we need to win will be best fought with a
unified front.


On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>

> Hi
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 05:28:49AM +1300, Jordan Carter wrote:
> >
> > I look forward to us moving on, getting this report out, getting CO
> > agreement, and getting on with implementation.
> I do too, but I confess I'm a little concerned in reading the poll
> results.  To the extent I see a pattern, it is of hardening divisions
> between people from different constituencies.  As I've said, I can
> support whatever consensus emerges (though like Becky, I think the
> arguments for one of these positions are quite clearly stronger than
> for the other one); but at the moment, I have no idea what consensus
> might emerge.  I really urge people to find a way at least not to
> object to some stable outcome.
> Best regards,
> A
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160223/3f8f7413/attachment.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list