[Ws2-jurisdiction] Was that progress?

[Seun Ojedeji]

Hello,

I just went through the notes which ofcourse will not contain details of
what happened but gives an idea of how things transpired in the meeting. I
have to say I was quite amazed at the level of "seeming" gang-up happening
in the chat.

Even though I remain one of the people who believe that there is no (can be
no) reason that would be strong enough to validate change of ICANN
jurisdiction in near future, I support asking question that identifies
problems based on facts and I also don't see any issue with asking factual
possibilities as it's something that can be easily proved wrong if the test
on the facts don't checkout. I was surprised and "somewhat" disappointed to
observe the level of sharp opposition on just questions on the chat.

I have to note that there may still be need to work on how to better
determine consensus in a diverse MS community like ours were each
individual have varying access to resources as I think something feels
broken.

Anyway, I like to pick a question posed by farzeneh below. I don't know if
it was answered. I hope the response is the latter as described in her
question.

"Farzaneh Badii: (07:28) If you get a response about ICANN jurisdiction
that does not directly relate to the questions but it is a problem that
ICANN jurisdiction raises, is the group going to discard it?or are we gonna
discuss it within the mandate of the group…"

While it seem progress was achieved in sending questions 1 to 4, all I will
say is that I pray wisdom for the rapporteur as he leads this diverse
group.

Regards
Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20170110/512fc12b/attachment.html>