[Ws2-jurisdiction] Jurisdiction Questionnaire: RESPONSE REQUESTED

[Paul Rosenzweig]

May I respectfully suggest that we are getting nowhere on this.   We need to find a way forward or we will keep going around and around

 

Many in the subgroup do not support sending out Question 4.  We have articulated reasons for that on several occasions.  I have considered carefully the arguments of those who do support sending out Question 4 and after thinking about it carefully, I cannot find a basis for agreeing to send out the question.  My thoughts are captured by David McC’s post on why this is a rabbit hole I oppose starting down.

 

Others in the group feel strongly that question 4 should go out.  Some feel so strongly that they are of the view that it is all or nothing.  While I don’t agree with them and while I certainly don’t agree with the idea that saying “all or nothing” is respectful of other people, I am not going to try any longer to change their minds.

 

If all or nothing is the only choice available, I think the way forward is clear – let’s do nothing and shelve the idea of a questionnaire altogether.  If anyone has concrete data to add (as Faranzeh did) they can do so as and when they wish.

 

Paul

 

 

Paul Rosenzweig

 <mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com

O: +1 (202) 547-0660

M: +1 (202) 329-9650

VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739

 <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/> www.redbranchconsulting.com

My PGP Key:  <https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684> https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684

 

From: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Kavouss Arasteh
Sent: Monday, January 9, 2017 12:26 PM
To: Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>; Olga Cavalli <occ at mrecic.gov.ar>; María Milagros Castañon Seoane <mcastanon at rree.gob.pe>; Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva <pedro.ivo at itamaraty.gov.br>; Perez Galindo, Rafael <RPEREZGA at minetur.es>; DE SALINS Ghislain <ghislain.de-salins at finances.gouv.fr>; Manal Ismail <manal at tra.gov.eg>; Alice Munyua <alice at dotafrica.org>; GUO Feng <guofeng at caict.ac.cn>
Cc: ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Jurisdiction Questionnaire: RESPONSE REQUESTED

 

Dear All

With all due respect, I strongly oppose detaching questions 1-3 from Q 4.

Either ALL 4Qs or nothing.

Pls collaborate 

This is counterproductive that from the very begining few people oppose to Q4 

Regards

Kavouss 

 

2017-01-09 17:56 GMT+01:00 Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu <mailto:milton at gatech.edu> >:

I support all the revisions to 1-3 and to the preamble that were proposed and gained support on the recent call. Essentially I support sending out the text Greg sent in his Jan 7 email unmodified. 

 

If we conclude that a questionnaire must go out then I support questions 1-3 as widely supported in the survey we did  – with no question 4. 

 

MM: I agree with David here, although I would be happy if we simply detach Q4, work on it some more until it is acceptable, and send it out later. 

I note that all the discussion and disagreement about what to do next comes from Q4. Once again, it is holding us up. Let’s cut the Gordian knot and detach the 1-3 from it, please, and move on. 

 

Dr. Milton L Mueller

Professor,  <http://spp.gatech.edu/> School of Public Policy

Georgia Institute of Technology

Internet Governance Project 

 <http://internetgovernance.org/> http://internetgovernance.org/ 

 

 

 


_______________________________________________
Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org <mailto:Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org> 
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20170109/c7e5af23/attachment-0001.html>