Hi Niels and all,
Now the question looks much clearer to me. Also addresses fully the
questions I asked earlier. I support the new wording.
Cheers
Tanya

On 2 Nov 2016 08:46, "Niels ten Oever" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> To reconcile the issue Milton has this might be most appropriate:
>
> 4. What steps is the ICANN board making to implement a Human
> Rights Impact Assessment of ICANN's policies and the organization?
>
> I realized though we might need a bit more background to this questions.
> I would like to offer this:
>
> 4. Following up on the discussion between the NCSG and the Board at the
> Marakesh meeting, we would be very interested to hear what steps the
> board is making in relation human rights in addition to the
> accountability processes. We would like to understand what efforts have
> been made and whether you could update us on planed activities
> concerning human rights and ICANN's policy processes as well as ICANN
> the organization?
>
> Looking forward to discuss!
>
> Best,
>
> Niels
>
>
>
> On 11/02/2016 09:56 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> > Dear Milton,
> >
> > You not agreeing on a question doesn't mean we don't have consensus. It
> > just means you're trying to block it.
> >
> > I also have given you two options to accommodate your concerns on which
> > you did not reply, nor did you provide argumentation for your issues. So
> > this response from you does not seem fair to me.
> >
> > For you reference, the two alternatives I provided to accommodate your
> > concerns:
> >
> > 4. What steps is the ICANN board making to implement a Human
> > Rights Impact Assessment of ICANN the organization?
> >
> > 4. What steps is the ICANN board making to implement a Human
> > Rights Impact Assessment of ICANN the organization and/or its
> > policies?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Niels
> >
> >
> > On 11/02/2016 08:54 AM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
> >> Tapani
> >> Sorry, but you need to take this process a lot more seriously.
> >> These interactions with the board are very important. You were given
> the question suggestions some time ago. Then we got one day to come to
> consensus on them. When there was no immediate consensus (predictably) you
> unilaterally declared that there was no time to fix them; now you say there
> is.
> >>
> >> Based on the latest comments, I would suggest that we drop Question 3
> (about Human rights).
> >> There isn't a consensus on it and it doesn't seem to be the kind of
> thing the board will decide, rather it will be worked out on WS2. Once WS2
> is further along and the board is set to make a decision we can frame a
> question  then.
> >>
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> >>> Tapani Tarvainen
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 1:29 PM
> >>> To: [log in to unmask]
> >>> Subject: Re: Topics for meeting with the board in Hyderabad?
> >>>
> >>> Hi Niels,
> >>>
> >>> I thought the changes over what I posted yesterday (discussed here
> today,
> >>> from Dave and Milton) were rather trivial, but perhaps I was wrong. In
> any
> >>> case they haven't been sent yet, and I guess it doesn't really matter
> if it takes
> >>> one more day. I'm just about to board my next flight so I can't do
> much about
> >>> it before reaching India, but feel free to debate details until then.
> >>>
> >>> Tapani
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Nov 01 18:46, Niels ten Oever ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Dear Tapani,
> >>>>
> >>>> Could you let us know which version of the questions you sent?
> >>>>
> >>>> If there were last minute changes, whereas we have discussed this
> >>>> already for quite a while, I think that would be a bit of a process
> issue.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>>
> >>>> Niels
> >>>>
> >>>> On 11/01/2016 06:37 PM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> >>>>> All,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm sorry, no more time for changes, it's past deadline and I'm off
> >>>>> to airport in half an hour so I asked Maryam to send it, hopefully
> >>>>> without too many typos left (I asked her to fix any obvious ones).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Apologies for leaving this so late,
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Niels ten Oever
> >>>> Head of Digital
> >>>>
> >>>> Article 19
> >>>> www.article19.org
> >>>>
> >>>> PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
> >>>>                    678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
> >
>
> --
> Niels ten Oever
> Head of Digital
>
> Article 19
> www.article19.org
>
> PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
>                    678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
>