[CCWG-ACCT] re-iterating the request for transparent communication!
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Tue Jan 12 16:08:16 UTC 2016
I would like to strongly support Farzaneh's request (below). For those
of us trying to follow onlist, this is extremely important.
On 2016-01-12 10:30, James Gannon wrote:
> Agreed I am starting to have serious concerns over our approach to
> this at this stage, we are neglecting key inputs in the name of
> timelines and doing so in a non-transparent manner.
> Particularly when it comes to the work of our legal counsel its
> imperative that we remember that the CCWG is the client here and that
> anything major with regards to dismissal or non-consideration of input
> from our lawyers must be a decision taken by the CCWG and not in a vacuum.
> From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf
> of Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org <mailto:mshears at cdt.org>>
> Date: Tuesday 12 January 2016 at 1:43 p.m.
> To: farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com
> <mailto:farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>>, Accountability Cross Community
> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] re-iterating the request for transparent
> I would like to support this request. I find it troubling that
> comments on the proposal by the CCWG's counsel are not being taken
> into account.
> On 12/01/2016 08:03, farzaneh badii wrote:
>> Dear Co-Chairs, All
>> Previously, I requested for a transparent public communication
>> channel which allowed everyone to have access to communication
>> between Staff, Co-chairs and others, especially when drafting the
>> proposal. It was not taken into consideration. No public channel was
>> provided for such communication. This would have prevented alot of
>> Now listening to what CCWG lawyers have to say about not including
>> their comments in the drafts of CCWG proposal (here is the link to
>> lawyers concerns https://community.icann.org/x/15dlAw ) which might
>> be just due to a total oversight, I was wondering if I could ask for
>> two things:
>> 1. Please make a public communication channel for co-chair
>> communication with Staff, communication among staff, and any
>> communication that has an effect on drafting the proposal.
>> 2. The lawyers in this call stated that some of their comments were
>> requested to be posted,including some that were sent on Sunday, but
>> they have not been. Can you please clarify which comments and why
>> they have not been posted and if it is an oversight I would like to
>> request all their comments that have not been posted to be posted as
>> soon as possible.
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> Matthew Shears
> Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
> Center for Democracy & Technology
> mshears at cdt.org
> + 44 771 247 2987
> This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
> 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