[CPWG] Ready, Fire, Aim

Tue Oct 24 10:54:12 UTC 2023

All,

As I think you all know, there is a 2 hour session tomorrow, “ALAC
Anniversary — Brainstorming on the Future” from 1:00-3:00 Hamburg time
(11:00-13:00 UTC).  That is what Jonathan said would happen and it’s
happening.

I think we should all approach that discussion with good faith and an open
mind.  We should do the same in all our discussions, including this one.

While we should all be thinking critically and be critical when warranted,
let’s all try to keep the criticism constructive and intended to advance
the dialogue.

Greg

On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 01:01 Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org> wrote:

> To be EXTRA clear, Evan WAS invited and has chosen not to participate. You
> even quoted the text in which I said we were having a session and would
> love for him to participate so I fail to understand your point. Perhaps you
> can clarify.
>
>
>
> Oh wow. Okay, well goodbye to you as also then.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> P.S. I had a great conversation with the folks from IFLA, in Kyoto.
> They’re very interested in our plans for end user education. Thanks for the
> idea.
>
> JZ
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *David Mackey <mackey361 at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 12:52 AM
> *To: *Jonathan Zuck <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>
> *Cc: *Evan Leibovitch <evanleibovitch at gmail.com>, CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [CPWG] Ready, Fire, Aim
>
> Hi Jonathan,
>
>
>
> I have read and re-read your message.
>
>
>
> I think it's very important to invite dissenting voices into the At-Large
> conversation. This is especially true for a global organization
> that interacts with the widest population possible. It makes the community
> stronger. It makes the output of At-Large more trustworthy.
>
>
>
> Since I don't wish to be labeled as an old-timer with an axe to grind in
> the future, I think it's time for me to withdraw my active participation in
> the at-large for now.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> David
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 6:24 PM Jonathan Zuck <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>
> wrote:
>
> I’m going to assume that you either failed to read my entire message or
> you are illiterate and unable to read it. Let me know which it is David, so
> I know whether to be angry or sad when you throw around an accusation of me
> not being genuine.
>
>
>
> *From: *David Mackey <mackey361 at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 12:20 AM
> *To: *Jonathan Zuck <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>
> *Cc: *Evan Leibovitch <evanleibovitch at gmail.com>, CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [CPWG] Ready, Fire, Aim
>
> "Frankly, I don’t think we’ll miss him a bit." Really?
>
>
>
> Is it fair to say that your statement on August 30th was not completely
> genuine?
>
>
>
> Is this something we should expect from At-Large leadership in the future?
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 6:14 PM Jonathan Zuck <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>
> wrote:
>
> Frankly, I don’t think we’ll miss him a bit. I ALREADY had a plan to have
> a discussion about our future, which includes further refining our mission
> and objectives and I invited this inconsolable crybaby to participate. I
> never promised he would lead anything or that we would adhere to his plan.
> I invited him to be a part of a discussion that was meant to address our
> priorities for the future. I was hoping to specifically include fellows and
> nextgen so we would NOT just hear from a bunch of old timers with an ax to
> grind.
>
>
>
> I don’t even know whether to address Evan’s latest rant with a response
> because he only remembers what he wants to remember. It began because he
> thought we were taking on an issue that we shouldn’t. We’ll be discussing
> what kind of issues we should take on. He suggested that we shouldn’t
> bother with registrants and that was specifically one of the questions I
> was already planning to cover because the previous consensus, before my
> time, was that that end users DID include registrants but that if there was
> a conflict of interest we would side with non-registrant end users. That
> is, in fact, a definitional question that Evan, in his wisdom, has decided
> to classify as navel gazing.
>
>
>
> I’m pretty sure there’s no greater navel gazing exercise than the creation
> of a “mission statement,” but rather than embarrass our periodic friend, I
> invited him to be part of the discussion. I then further reached out to him
> privately with what I was planning, inviting his input. Instead of giving
> it he decided to ONCE. AGAIN throw a pointless tantrum on the list.
>
>
>
> So, I say again. Evan, don’t let the door hit you in the ass. We have work
> to do and there’s no room for babies.
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *CPWG <cpwg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of David Mackey via CPWG <
> cpwg at icann.org>
> *Date: *Monday, October 23, 2023 at 11:58 PM
> *To: *Evan Leibovitch <evanleibovitch at gmail.com>
> *Cc: *CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [CPWG] Ready, Fire, Aim
>
> Jonathan,
>
>
>
> Can you please help us understand where your statement on August 30th
> broke down?
>
>
>
> *"In any case, let’s have a fulsome discussion about the future of the
> At-Large and what we want from it, in Hamburg. I’ve set aside 2 hours for
> our anniversary which is intended to be 10min of celebration and 1:50 of
> discussion, breakouts, debate, etc. Evan, I hope you’ll be able to
> participate."*
>
>
>
> It seems to me that the lack of Evan's experience in our discussions will
> severely limit the value of any attempt to have a "fulsome" discussion.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 4:14 PM Evan Leibovitch via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
> wrote:
>
> So, apparently...
>
>
>
> The specific process and timeline I proposed in August, which attracted a
> number of endorsements and approvals, has no time in any agenda in Hamburg.
> Instead there'll be some kind of amorphous discussion of "At-Large TNG" or
> whatever at the anniversary, involving the same kind of never-ending
> discussion of definitions and navel-gazing that my proposal explicitly
> attempted to reduce.
>
>
>
> It's hard to come to a conclusion *other than* At-Large prefers endless
> introspection and unfocused participation over concrete focus and specific
> action in service of its bylaw mandate. I consider the reaction to my
> proposal an act of bad faith and will not be participating in whatever
> happens Wednesday.
>
>
>
> Never let it be said that I have only been negative. But when I come up
> with something constructive and specific that even seems to be met with
> broad agreement and interest in participation, it gets binned without
> explanation and replaced by the status quo. As currently constituted, this
> environment once again demonstrates that it is incapable of improving
> itself, let alone the rest of ICANN.
>
>
>
> - Evan
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 3:30 PM Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:
>
> Given the short notice and unusual nature of such a travel request, I
> would like to suggest this timeline:
>
>    1. Have a "kickoff" in Hamburg, with me participating virtually. I
>    would prepare for and introduce the topic during the anniversary meeting
>    Jonathan mentioned and we would then start to assemble a working group. My
>    preference would be for a small team, preferably of people with strong
>    written English communications skills who have not participated in other
>    ICANN constituencies
>    2. The group would communicate by email list and ad-hoc virtual
>    meetings, reporting progress back to ALAC meetings. If human resources
>    allow, it would be optimal for a group representative to present and take
>    feedback at every RALO at least once.
>    3. The working group -- hopefully with me there in person -- would
>    present its work early in the week of ICANN79 meeting, conducting a public
>    workshop for last-minute fine-tuning, with the intention of ALAC
>    endorsement at its closing meeting.
>    4. The working group disbands, and proposes that ALAC revisit the
>    issue every five years.
>
> - Evan
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada
>
> @evanleibovitch / @el56
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20231024/87dff73b/attachment-0001.html>