I like snarky people. They tend to be honest. The precedent stinks. If we go forward we need to strongly "Bush v. Gore" this in our SG response. RySG did a decent job of that - we can be even stronger in our objection. Ignore them and they will go away didn't work so well for all the special committees our dear leader created, if this note could brake the train I can live with it. Still think it could come back to haunt us with the next manufactured crisis, but as long as us bottom dwelling Fadi perceived sheep don't board the train - we live to baaa another day. 

 

As someone who can rival Avri in snarkiness, I want to say in response to Ed that the best way to respond to Fadi’s manufactured sense of urgency is with an immediate, urgent message that we are not boarding the train. We can fill out the details later, but the railroad needs to be braked. Now.

 

If snarkiness is a quality that causes others to think, that term may apply to Avri because that’s what she’s done here to me. She’s right – this is just bad precedent.

 

Look, I know Mr. Chehade is trying to create sense of urgency, a sense of crisis that we’re all supposed to respond to by getting in alignment with whatever he proposes.  Accountability and transparency are perhaps the two most vital issues facing ICANN today. As a Stakeholder Group we’ve been yelling about them for years. We were largely ignored. Now is not the time to rush to action just because the folks who were ignoring us suddenly have a self imposed timetable to meet. These are important issues and the structures for resolving them need to be carefully considered.