[Internal-cg] Fwd: RFP - publishable draft?

Kavouss Arasteh kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Sat Aug 30 12:30:05 UTC 2014


Dear All,
My rev 2 doc. relating to amenfment to v 14 of Draft RFP has not been taken
into account
I think it is not fair withourt examining a proposal it should be ignored
Kavouss
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: joseph alhadeff <joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com>
Date: 2014-08-30 11:35 GMT+02:00
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] RFP - publishable draft?
To: Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>


 Off list:

I've lost a bit of the thread...

Which of your proposed edits s the one that hasn't been properly accounted
for?

Joe

On 8/30/2014 3:31 AM, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:

 Dear All,
Dear Alissa
What Milton agreed was on consensus building process and not on RFP .
What we are talking here is RFP. I have made some changes which are not of
editorial nature but essential.
There are inconsistencies in the v14 as I have indicated.
I have sent that twice and I request to be considered before being
published as draft .
I am not in the little group nevertheless the amendment that I have
proposed are essebntial.
However, should every body agree that the draft should be published I have
no problem provided that everybody understand that the amendments proposed
by me are still valid and to be considered.
I have informed in different manner
Regards
Kavouss



2014-08-30 9:29 GMT+02:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>:

>  Dear All,
> Dear Alissa
> what Milton agreed was on consensus building process.
> What we are talking here is RFP. I have made some changes which are not of
> editorial nature but essential.
> There are inconsistencies in the v14 as I have indicated.
> I have sent that twice and I request to be considered before being
> published as draft .
> I am not in the little group nevertheless the amendment that I have
> proposed are essebntial.
> However, should every body agree that the draft should be published I have
> no problem provided that everybody understand that the amendments proposed
> by me are still valid and to be considered.
> I have informed in different manner
> Regards
> Kavouss
>
>
> 2014-08-30 7:06 GMT+02:00 Paul Wilson <pwilson at apnic.net>:
>
> I am keen to publish the draft, as a draft, soon please.  It doesn’t need
>> to be perfected before we do that.
>>
>> For the record I agree with Kavouss’ suggestions, as amended by Milton,
>> and happy for these to be included
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> Paul.
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________________
>> Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC                      <dg at apnic.net>
>> http://www.apnic.net                                     +61 7 3858 3100
>> <%2B61%207%203858%203100>
>>
>> See you at APNIC 38!                      http://conference.apnic.net/38
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 30 Aug 2014, at 4:26 am, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Milton,
>> > Thank you again for yr analysis
>> > Yes I could make a consensus with your last suggestion
>> > Pls go ahead and I thank you for that.
>> > By the way do you know any ting about a book published in 70 s about
>> that group?
>> > tks and have a nice week-end ,if I do not hear from you
>> > Kavouss
>> >
>> >
>> > 2014-08-29 20:12 GMT+02:00 Mohamed El Bashir <mbashir at mbash.net>:
>> > After reviewing Kavouss RFP updates, I prefer to keep the text " light
>> coordination role" and I am fine with the rest of the updates .
>> >
>> > We suppose to finished and published the RFP yesterday, I propose move
>> ahead and publish the latest version as agreed before the IGF.
>> >
>> > Kind Regards,
>> > Mohamed
>> >
>> > On 29 Aug 2014, at 19:47, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Dear Manal
>> >> ,
>> >> I am not pointing toward any one who made the suggestion that the
>> adjective " Light " being added to the word or term " Coordination "
>> >> I am just saysing that ICG tasks . interalia, is to coordinate the
>> activities .
>> >> This does not any thing to do with TOP down or button up process .Just
>> it does not feet. It give the impression that the activities of ICCG on
>> this matter is a light activitiwes and not a complete and in-depth
>> >> Tks
>> >> Kavouss
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2014-08-29 19:10 GMT+02:00 Manal Ismail <manal at tra.gov.eg>:
>> >> This was not the intention of course .. I have inserted this clause
>> “in order to help ICG maintain its light coordination role” as I thought 2
>> things would make it more convincing for non-operational parties to work
>> through the operational communities processes:
>> >>
>> >> -          to make sure the ICG does not have a top-down
>> decision-making authority, and
>> >>
>> >> -          to make sure their contributions are considered early
>> within the process, and directly discussed with the relevant party
>> >>
>> >> Just thought to clarify, but I’m flexible should colleagues feel it
>> does not serve the purpose of the first bullet ..
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Kind Regards
>> >>
>> >> --Manal
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
>> internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Kavouss Arasteh
>> >> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 6:45 PM
>> >> To: Milton L Mueller
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Cc: Coordination Group
>> >> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] RFP - publishable draft?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Dear Milton,
>> >>
>> >> Thank you very much for your kind response .You are among the most
>> knowledgeable and competent as far as I understand the exchange of message.
>> >>
>> >> Pls kindly note that the term LIGHT before coordination, weakenes our
>> actions .It could be interpreted that the coordination actions that we
>> undertake is not sufficiently serious as it is qualified by the adjective
>> LIGHT.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Would it cause any difficulty that we delete that and just refer to
>> coordination without any qualification.
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >>
>> >> Kavouss
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2014-08-29 15:54 GMT+02:00 Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>:
>> >>
>> >> My opinions regarding Kavouss’s proposed changes:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Would prefer to keep “light” in there.
>> >>
>> >> OK to remove the word “only” from the paragraph on Comments
>> >>
>> >> OK to replace “direct” with “forward”
>> >>
>> >> OK to replace “encourages” with “urges”
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Milton L Mueller
>> >>
>> >> Laura J and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
>> >>
>> >> Syracuse University School of Information Studies
>> >>
>> >> http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
>> internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Martin Boyle
>> >> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 8:46 AM
>> >> To: Kavouss Arasteh; Daniel Karrenberg
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Cc: Coordination Group
>> >> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] RFP - publishable draft?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks Alissa for your work on this.  I’m sure we could continue
>> word-smithing this for a long time, and I’m happy to go.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Kavouss’s comment on light:  I like the term as it reminds everyone
>> that we are not planning to play the autocrats.  But if non-native English
>> speakers find the meaning obscure I’m ok without.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Cheers
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Martin
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
>> internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Kavouss Arasteh
>> >> Sent: 29 August 2014 13:32
>> >> To: Daniel Karrenberg
>> >> Cc: Coordination Group
>> >> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] RFP - publishable draft?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Dear Alissa,
>> >>
>> >> Dear All,
>> >>
>> >> I suggest some small amendments to make various parts of the text
>> consistent with each other
>> >>
>> >> See attachment
>> >>
>> >> Kavouss  the l
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2014-08-29 13:37 GMT+02:00 Daniel Karrenberg <
>> daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net>:
>> >>
>> >> On 28.08.14 23:36 , Alissa Cooper wrote:
>> >> > ...
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Are there any objections to publishing this as a draft (and having
>> the
>> >> > secretariat host it on our web site and make an announcement about
>> its
>> >> > existence) by Sept 1?
>> >>
>> >> I support publishing this as a daft with Elise's corrections.
>> >>
>> >> Daniel
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Internal-cg mailing list
>> >> Internal-cg at icann.org
>> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Internal-cg mailing list
>> >> Internal-cg at icann.org
>> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Internal-cg mailing list
>> > Internal-cg at icann.org
>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Internal-cg mailing list
>> > Internal-cg at icann.org
>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
>>
>
>


_______________________________________________
Internal-cg mailing
listInternal-cg at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20140830/a12473e1/attachment.html>


More information about the Internal-cg mailing list