Yup good point with that framing.
-jg
On 29/02/2016, 6:21 a.m., "Stephanie Perrin" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>I agree, but if we want to simply put it on the record that we are not
>amused, this is the time.
>SP
>
>On 2016-02-29 0:59, James Gannon wrote:
>> I agree we got a bad deal on that but its dead in the water for getting more people onto it, the rejection of the BC request was pretty absolute so they won’t backtrack on that or us either.
>>
>> -jg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 29/02/2016, 3:38 a.m., "NCSG-Discuss on behalf of Stephanie Perrin" <[log in to unmask] on behalf of [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> We are concerned about the limited number of folks on the Consumer
>>> protection, competition and trust review that is going on at the
>>> moment. Carlos is our only person on that, Malcolm was rejected. You
>>> may recall the BC requested adding one of their members, in the name of
>>> gender balance.
>>> Stephanie
>>>
>>> On 2016-02-28 22:29, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>>>> Tapani
>>>> As a veteran of many of these sessions, I want us to avoid wasting time and just generating animosity.
>>>> I would strongly encourage us to ask questions that:
>>>> a) are forward-looking, and give us an opportunity to shape agendas and perceptions on things that are not already finished
>>>> b) involve requests for things that the board or staff could actually deliver for us
>>>>
>>>> Any ideas about that?
>>>>
>>>> E.g., is there are request we can make regarding the RDS (Whois) process that would position us better?
>>>> Are there any requests regarding the implementation process for the CCWG recommendations that will help us make sure things don't go off track? Are there any committees that we can ask to be on?
>>>> Can we ask them about the impending GNSO review and whether they agreed with our assessment of the biased Westlake report? Things of that sort
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>>>>> Tapani Tarvainen
>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 6:10 AM
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: Questions to the Board?
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> One regular event at ICANN meetings is that we get to meet the Board, talk
>>>>> with them about and ask them whatever we want.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Board would, however, like to know in advance what we're going to ask
>>>>> them, so they could better prepare for it.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you have suggestions for topics for our meeting with the Board in
>>>>> Marrakech, please let me know as soon as possible (feel free to post to the list
>>>>> or me directly, as you prefer).
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Tapani Tarvainen
>
|
