[gnso-osc-csg] Subtask4 Toolkit- from ss

[SS Kshatriy <sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Chuck and WT,
1. There were quite interesting discussions on the topic of pushing Toolkit 
alone to OSC and to GNSO Council in the last WT meeting on Friday, September 
25, 2009.
It was agreed by Chuck that there is no provision in Charter to send 
recommendations of one task in piecemeal. However, he was of the view that as 
it is not expressly prohibited, it can be sent. My argument is that once we are 
doing something out of Charter, why to involve WT. Let us keep some sanctity to 
our work. Let the Charter be a sacrosanct document until it becomes necessary 
to amend it. Let us not play with these for narrow ends.
 
However, there is some desperateness in sending Toolkit and the arguments 
forwarded in its favor in the meeting do not appear to be sound. I will support 
such personal requirements and give a way-out at the end of this write-up.
 
2. This write-up is in no way critical to Chuck. I regard him very highly. I 
appreciate him for the arguments he puts forth. I have worked with such 
talented persons in my long career. It is possible to make a mountain of 
nothing with arguments and to skirt important issues by arguments. Others in 
the group may not be able to counter argue by their very nature. I appreciate 
such successful persons.
But, in the said meeting, in my view, he faltered a little and went on giving 
one argument after another. Also, to oppose other subtasks being submitted 
separately he brought out such issues as ‘full consensus’. 
 
3. In the meeting, while supporting Toolkit submission, one of the members said 
that, "we receive lots of papers in Constituencies and it is difficult to 
review in piecemeal." He was referring to the all subtasks 1 to 4 being 
submitted as and when ready. But he was prepared to review Subtask 4 if 
submitted separately. 
 
4. Many of the arguments appeared strange and funny to me. As a result, I am 
constrained to write this mail. I will still like to make it clear that I am 
not critical to anybody. I am just amused. If it gives any other impression, 
the only reason could be that I could not use a better language.
 
5. Now, the most Important point:
Let us close the arguments on Toolkit.
Chair is supposed to send periodic reports to OSC. She will otherwise report 
about completion of Toolkit. OSC Chair can take up from there and hurry up with 
Council for whatever it is needed to be done.
WT will thus be spared from further arguments and will better spend time on 
constructive work.
Best regards,
SS