[CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability - WS2 Presentation for meeting tomorrow - Minor corrections

[Thomas Rickert]

All,
as I mentioned in my previous e-mail to the list, let us discuss the issue during the upcoming call. It is a bit unfortunate that there is so much suspicion.

I am sure we will be able to put most, if not all, concerns at rest. Some will be disappointed that there are no evil forces at work.

Talk to you in a few hours.

Best,
Thomas



> Am 31.05.2016 um 17:46 schrieb Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com>:
> 
> Why is anyone surprised that those holding the resources are going to
> constrain you?  It is in ICANN's corporate interest to limit outside review.
> 
> If we were serious about the process we would ask ICANN for a top line # for
> how much it is willing to spend on the WS2 process and then WE would decide
> how to allocate it:  transcription; travel support; legal support; whatever.
> I have no real problem with ICANN setting an overall budget (subject, of
> course, to the new EC budget review powers).  But allocation and priority
> setting should be by the CCWG.
> 
> Paul
> 
> Paul Rosenzweig
> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
> O: +1 (202) 547-0660
> M: +1 (202) 329-9650
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
> www.redbranchconsulting.com
> My PGP Key
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan
> Greenberg
> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 9:11 AM
> To: Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net>;
> accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability - WS2 Presentation for meeting
> tomorrow - Minor corrections
> 
> Without commenting on the specifics of the issues (whether staff note taking
> or transcriptions or whatever), the entire discussion on costs started with
> us being told that we had exceeded our budget, a budget we were not aware
> of, did not know what it covered, and had absolutely no handle on what the
> costs were that were associated with it.
> 
> I would have hoped that this time around, if we were making cost vs benefit
> decisions, we would not only be told the "decision", but also made aware of
> the specific costs that were being deemed to be too high and thus
> eliminated.
> 
> VERY tiresome.
> 
> Alan
> 
> At 31/05/2016 04:02 AM, Nigel Roberts wrote:
>> I support Avri, Marilyn et al on transcription.
>> 
>> The lack of transcription is a direct attack on the ability of
>> non-native speakers to participate, whether unintentional or intentional.
>> 
>> But I'll really not surprised.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 31/05/16 05:27, Harold Arcos wrote:
>>> Hello Avri, everyone
>>> 
>>> I join in the thanks of Carlos towards Avri regarding noted lack of
>>> the transcription.
>>> Her POV is more than right because the reading allow follow much
>>> better the argumentative process.
>>> 
>>> I agree with your question and I joinv
>>> 
>>> Kind regards
>>> 
>>> Harold Arcos
>>> +58 4129982820
>>> skp: harcos0912
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 12:17 PM, avri doria <avri at apc.org
>>> <mailto:avri at apc.org>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>    Hi,
>>> 
>>>    I would like to question the non transcription decision.
>>> 
>>>    Especially in the case where the participants are responsible for
> both
>>>    participating and making sure all discussed issues are included, the
>>>    transcription is important.  It also helps those for whom English is
> not
>>>    a first language, who read better than they parse peoples varying
>>>    accents and pronunciations.
>>> 
>>>    avri
>>> 
>>> 
>>>    On 30-May-16 11:46, Bernard Turcotte wrote:
>>>> All,
>>>> 
>>>> Minor corrections to the slides on WS2 attached.
>>>> 
>>>> B.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>    <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>>> 
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>> 
>>> 
>>>    ---
>>>    This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>>    https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>> 
>>>    _______________________________________________
>>>    Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>    Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>    <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>>> 
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160531/d46a88f7/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160531/d46a88f7/signature-0001.asc>