[CCWG-ACCT] Recommendation 4 - power to remove Individual Board director - 1st reading conclusions
steve at shinkuro.com
Thu Jan 7 11:11:40 UTC 2016
I'm merely a pedant-in-passing, so I'll offer this response but not engage further.
I suspect you were taught as I was that "fulsome" was a strongly negative term despite its seemingly positive composition. Over the last few decades, its usage has shifted, and I now see it used in a positive sense. I think it's become genuinely ambiguous, like "biannual," and I avoid using it myself. But it's not a big deal because the intended meaning is usually clear from the context. For reference see
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 7, 2016, at 4:08 AM, Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net> wrote:
> As pedant-in-residence, I object to the word 'fulsome' in any event.
> "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means".
>> complimentary or flattering to an excessive degree.
>> "they are almost embarrassingly fulsome in their appreciation"
>> synonyms: excessive, extravagant, overdone, immoderate, inordinate, over-appreciative, flattering, adulatory, fawning, unctuous, ingratiating, cloying, saccharine; enthusiastic, effusive, rapturous, glowing, gushing, profuse, generous, lavish;
>> informalover the top, smarmy
>> 1. Excessively flattering or insincerely earnest. See Synonyms at unctuous.
>> 2. Disgusting or offensive: "With the stink of decaying corpses so near her cave ... suddenly she felt overpowered by the fulsome reek" (Jean Auel).
>> 3. Usage Problem Copious or abundant.
>> [Middle English fulsom, abundant, well-fed, arousing disgust : ful, full; see FULL1 + -som, adj. suff.; see -SOME1.]
>> fulsome·ly adv.
>> fulsome·ness n.
>> Usage Note: The original meaning of fulsome was "copious, abundant." But fulsome is now most often used of remarks that involve excessive praise or ingratiating flattery, as in Their fulsome compliments were viewed as an awkward attempt at winning approval. This narrower application of the word has become its sole meaning for many educated speakers, to the point where a large majority of the Usage Panel disapproves of the use of fulsome to mean simply "full" or "copious." In our 2012 survey, only 19 percent accepted the use of fulsome as a synonym of full in the sentence You can adjust the TV's audio settings for a more fulsome bass in movie soundtracks. Use of the word as a synonym of copious or expansive found only slightly more takers—21 percent accepted The final report will furnish a more detailed and fulsome discussion of the issues involved. The use of fulsome as a simple synonym of praising without a clear indication of inordinacy or insincerity split the Panel n!
> early dow
> the middle, with 55 percent accepting the example The research director claimed that the product was a major advance that would improve Web access for everyone, and the marketing VP was equally fulsome in her remarks. Thus it may be best to avoid fulsome except where the context unambiguously conveys the idea that the praise in question is excessive or fawning.
>> On 01/06/2016 10:51 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>> I have a concern and resultant question (directed at any Directors who
>> choose to reply) regarding the phrase "A petition must be supported by a
>> fulsome and written rationale stating the reasons why removal is sought."
>> Let me create a scenario. Directors are chosen by an SO or At-Large not
>> because they will "represent" the appointing body, but (among other
>> reasons) because there is a general belief that the candidate espouses
>> beliefs and standards similar to those held by those who are selecting
>> the Board member. This is a VERY subjective decision, and not one that
>> is particularly provable.
>> If, as time unfolds, those involved with the appointing body
>> overwhelmingly come to feel that the judgement was either incorrect, or
>> more pointedly, if it were to be made again, the candidate would NOT be
>> selected, would expressing this satisfy the "fulsome rationale"?
>> At 06/01/2016 09:02 AM, Mathieu Weill wrote:
>>> Dear Colleagues,
>>> Please find below the main conclusions of our deliberations during
>>> call #74. The updated document is attached.
>>> a. to mitigate risk of litigation in case of Board removal,
>>> pre-service letters for Board members could be required (see paragraph
>>> 39 page 9)
>>> b. a written rationale will be offered very early in the
>>> c. Lawyers are tasked to provide adequate language to provide adequate
>>> direction for implementation.
>>> POST MEETING NOTE :
>>> This version includes edits to incorporate comments from the Icann
>>> Board (section 3c – page 12 of the Icann Board comment) that were not
>>> included in the previous version (thanks to Kavouss for drawing our
>>> attention to this). Each of these comments were considered as useful
>>> directions for implementation. (see paragraphs 41 and 48)
>>> 2^nd reading is planned during next Tuesday’s call.
>>> Mathieu WEILL
>>> AFNIC - directeur général
>>> Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06
>>> mathieu.weill at afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>
>>> Twitter : @mathieuweill
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community