RE: [gnso-idng] reporting back to the council

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

How about a censure of Eric for being such a jackass?

Oh... did I say that out loud?!

Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087
http://rodenbaugh.com


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Edmon Chung
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 6:10 PM
To: gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-idng] reporting back to the council


Am happy to not be leading the conversation if someone is willing to take
that role (in fact, have had hoped someone would emerge to lead the
discussion) :-)
And, I apologize for my intermittent ability to contribute.
Nevertheless, I do continue to believe that the issue is important and worth
the time to discuss and complete.
The insistence to continue is out of that belief and not in any interest to
lengthen this unnecessarily.

Back to the discussion itself.
For our upcoming call, perhaps the agenda should be:
- consideration of report back to GNSO council
- next steps, if any, recommendations (e.g. dissolving and reconstitution of
a group)

Anything else we should include?

Edmon




> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf
> Of Gomes, Chuck
> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 2:45 AM
> To: Eric Brunner-Williams
> Cc: Avri Doria; gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-idng] reporting back to the council
> 
> 
> Eric,
> 
> In my earlier response to your message, I failed to respond to the
> following: "Edmon should not "lead" telephone conferences. It is hard
> enough for a native English speaker, and everyone needs significant
> training to not fill the time with "um" and "ah" fillers and other
> non-essential utterances."
> 
> Are you honestly suggesting that only native English speackers should
> lead telephone conferences? I hope not.
> 
> Secondly, I find your characterization of Edmon to be way off base.  In
> my many dealings with him over the years, I have always found his
> English skills to be excellent.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eric Brunner-Williams [mailto:ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 10:13 AM
> > To: Gomes, Chuck
> > Cc: Avri Doria; gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [gnso-idng] reporting back to the council
> >
> > On 4/18/10 8:59 AM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> > >
> > > ...
> > > Finally, I apologise if the wording of the response caused this
> > > perception: "Please do not treat me like an idiot who
> > disagrees with
> > > you just to waste your time."  This is a debate that has occurred
> > > multiple times in the PDP itself and during implemenation and I
> > > confess to being personally frustrated that we are having to go
> > > through it again because I felt that it had been put to rest, while
> > > still be aware that Avri never did support it.
> >
> > Of course, as the New gTLD PDP took place prior to reform,
> > CORE was not a participant, being excluded from the RyC, and
> > not a member of the groups of registrars which have the
> > greatest influence in the RC process.
> >
> > So I'm not commenting on that aspect, that is, the substantive issue.
> >
> > I will comment on the process.
> >
> > Edmon should not "lead" telephone conferences. It is hard
> > enough for a native English speaker, and everyone needs
> > significant training to not fill the time with "um" and "ah"
> > fillers and other non-essential utterances.
> >
> > Call schedules should be held to, not abandoned.
> >
> > Absence of politeness, of civility or cordiality cannot have
> > constructive uses, though these are useful for preventing
> > communication.
> >
> > There are people in the ICANN community I no longer read
> > under any circumstances, in any venue, because I've no
> > interest in sorting through their self-justificational
> > framework, or their other-depricational framework, to find
> > their actual ideas which are not dependent upon
> > self-promotion or other-demotion, and I've reached my end of
> > discourse with Avri.
> >
> > This drafting team is small.
> >
> > It can reasonably fail to make any recommendation concerning
> > gTLD IDNs which are distinct from gTLDs because the linkage
> > between ccTLD IDNs under FastTrack and gTLD IDNs under the
> > new gTLD process in prior policy statements is overtaken by
> > events, or simply discarded.
> >
> > [Adrian, this is your queue, to keep it simple, and friendly.]
> >
> > This is why we cannot say anything about a Hebrew Script,
> > Yiddish Language, "museum-in-Yiddish" application by
> > MuseDoma, or a Han Script, Chinese Language,
> > "commercial-in-SC-or-TC-or-Both", nor can we say anything
> > about a Hebrew Script, Yiddish Language,
> > "anything-in-Yiddish" or a Han Script, Chinese Language,
> > "anything-in-chinese", to pick two extreme example types
> > using the existing set of contracts and known competencies.
> >
> > [Adrian, incumbents don't deserve more advantages, again, to
> > keep it simple, and friendly.]
> >
> > It cannot reasonably fail because one person skipped a call,
> > and did not schedule any subsequent calls.
> >
> > It cannot reasonably fail because two persons are conducting
> > a disagreement over whether an example should, or should not,
> > have a certain kind of covert, yet argued by the disputants,
> > primary meaning.
> > It is not reasonable that choices around "ping the duck" lead
> > to an inability to state issues and report recommendations.
> >
> > Significant changes of status of issues relating to the
> > future of ICANN and IDNs have taken place since this drafting
> > team was formed.
> >
> > I have a recommendation. I recommend that the drafting team
> > reconstitute, as a smaller group. I recommend that the
> > parties who have contributed to non-progress not insist upon
> > their continuing contribution to a second attempt by the
> > reconstituted drafting team to draft something more
> > substantive than has been achieved to date, for submission to
> > the Council.
> >
> > Failure over policy differences is reasonable. Failure over
> > administrative or presentation differences is unreasonable.
> >
> > To paraphrase Adrian, it would be nice to get along, but
> > we're not, and we can do a couple of different things about that.
> >
> > Eric
> >
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.801 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2815 - Release Date: 04/17/10
02:31:00