Thank you for your clarification, Nick. I'm sure you did not intend to cause further confusion and perpetuate misperceptions about NCUC's position. I'll ask again: Would you please forward NCUC's letter (attached again) that tries to clear up this misperception to the ALAC list? Thank you, Robin  On Oct 21, 2009, at 4:19 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > Dear Robin: > > Thanks for your note. > > Firstly, I think it is important to state that contrary to the > subject line of your email, I am not trying to stir up anything. It > seems to me that it is not helpful to assume the worst with respect > to the motivations of others, as it is my experience that one is > likely to be wrong far more often than one is right, which is > unfortunately the case here. You and I have known and worked with > one another for almost ten years now, much longer than I have been > involved in ICANN. During that time, I cannot think of any point at > which we have suggested that the other persons motivations were > anything other than as stated "on the tin." > > Having reviewed your letter of 18th August 2009, I note that you > have said in your point 3: > > "Third, because of the danger of locking in a suboptimal structure, > we ask you not to approve any new Constítuencies under the SIC and > ICANN staff-imposed transitional NCSG charter until the ongoing > debates over the status of Constituencies and their role in the > NCSG is resolved next year." > > I think it is therefore fair to say that where I said: > > "… the NCUC had asked the Board to refrain from approving any new > GNSO Constituencies for the two year Non Commercial Stakeholder > Group Transition period. …" > > I should have said: > > "… the NCUC had asked the Board to refrain from approving any new > GNSO Constituencies until "the ongoing debates over the status of > Constituencies and their role in the NCSG is resolved next year"" > > As that would have precisely quoted you and what you said. > > I am therefore happy to apologise for the above, which I hope you > will accept; I have copied the same two mailing lists that the > original email was sent to in order to ensure that everyone who > received the original has received this reply. As I think my reply > to the NCUC-Discuss list will bounce, I would be glad if you > forwarded this note to that list too. > > On a personal note, I look forward to seeing you in Seoul, and hope > your travels are as comfortable as is possible on such a long flight. > > > From: Robin Gross [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > Sent: 21 October 2009 15:54 > To: Nick Ashton-Hart > Cc: Alan Greenberg; William Drake; at-large@atlarge- > lists.icann.org; [log in to unmask]; Rod Beckstrom > Subject: NCUC Response to Board Letter & why is staff trying to > stir up trouble again? > > Nick: > > I note you mis-state NCUC's position saying that we asked the board > for no constituencies to be created for 2 years on the ALAC list: > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large_atlarge- > lists.icann.org/2009q4/006118.html > > That is simply not true. Staff continuing to repeat these divisive > untrue statements, especially after having been told they are wrong > is very frustrating and counter-productive to everyone. > > NCUC was also concerned that the Board believed that untruth since > it was in that letter that you mention. Therefore NCUC sent a > response to the board to the letter you cite in hopes of clearing > up the misperception (that you are trying to re-muddy here). > > Would you please be so kind as to forward to the ALAC list where > you just mis-quoted NCUC's position the attached NCUC response to > clear up this misperception? > > Thank you, > Robin > > IP JUSTICE Robin Gross, Executive Director 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451 w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask]