Thanks Tapani and all,
As much as I agree in us having board on spot, it is
important to know that no one is a bank of
knowledge, so those who are thinking we must
disgrace members of the board by way of using our
hardknocked questions, should also know that we all
are culpable on any deficiency, probably we did not
support them enough after putting them there to
serve.
I have been on boards, I know how it feels, at
most they may diplomatically parry the question if
it sounds so confusing with a promise to give a
later response with better understanding, that is if
the questioner follows up.
So, in that spirit, I support 100% the Seun's option
B, to get them prepared and we still have right to
express our position from another point even if not
satisfied, therefore, I do not have problem with
whatever questions people may have.
With the regards to Sam's concern, probably, we may
start an inhouse quest on transparency as you already
promised after Marrakesh. We look forward to that, but
its not the best to watch our dirty linen in ICANN
public meeting. Inhouse cleansing is advocated. But I
think Rafik just shared what I would describe as
supposed operational finance manual with respect to
NCSG.