Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Uniformity

[Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Zahid,
certainly, all participants have their own experience through their
involvement in constituencies or in the council. but I don' understand that
argument in the case of uniformity? what about fairness?
if the aim is to maintain exceptions, I am wondering if the ongoing
improvement  is still meaningful?

Rafik


2009/10/15 Zahid Jamil <zahid@xxxxxxxxx>

> I would differ. I believe all of us bring value to the table as a result of
> our experience in our separate constituencies or other ICANN structures. If
> this was supposed to be a completely isolated initiative then all of us from
> any constituency or even as GNSO council members should recuse ourselves and
> let completely independent folk deal with this.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Zahid Jamil
> Barrister-at-law
> Jamil & Jamil
> Barristers-at-law
> 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
> Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
> Cell: +923008238230
> Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
> Fax: +92 21 5655026
> www.jamilandjamil.com
>
> Notice / Disclaimer
> This message contains confidential information and its contents are being
> communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended
> recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
> Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this
> message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may
> contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law,
> and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client
> privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of
> any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing
> it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or
> incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written
> permission and consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
>
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
> ------------------------------
> *From: * Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>
> *Date: *Thu, 15 Oct 2009 02:11:15 +0900
> *To: *<zahid@xxxxxxxxx>
> *Cc: *Gomes, Chuck<cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; <victoria@xxxxxxxxxx>; <
> Glen@xxxxxxxxx>; <owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>; <gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>
> *Subject: *Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Uniformity
>
> Hi Zahid,
> Thanks for reply. it was typo because I wanted to say:
>  'I think that we should:- behave in the way to *NOT* only defend the
> interests of our respective constituency instead looking for a common
> ground.'
>
> I want to say again that we need uniformity and no constituency can ask for
> privilege or exceptions, they all should be equal, no ;)?
>
> Rafik
>
> 2009/10/15 Zahid Jamil <zahid@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>> I see an obvious contradiction between the two statements from the email
>> below?:
>>
>> 'I think that we should:- behave in the way to only defend the interests
>> of our respective constituency instead looking for a common ground.'
>>
>> And
>>
>> 'I disagree with any attempt to defend the particular interest
>> of constituency by trying to setup a lot of exceptions which de facto means
>> the maintain of  statu quo.'
>>
>>
>> How can we 'only defend the interests of our respective constituency' and
>> yet not 'defend the particular interest of constituency'. ?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------Original Message------
>> From: Rafik Dammak
>> To: Gomes, Chuck
>> Cc: victoria@xxxxxxxxxx
>> Cc: zahid@xxxxxxxxx
>> Cc: Glen@xxxxxxxxx
>> Cc: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx
>> Cc: gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Uniformity
>> Sent: 10 Oct 2009 17:10
>>
>> Hello , I think that we should: - behave in the way to only defend the
>> interests of our respective constituency instead looking for a common
>> ground. I want to talk that because the discussion about uniformity which is
>> aimed to make charters, bylaws and so on more coherent between all
>> constituencies. I disagree with any attempt to defend the particular
>> interest of constituency by trying to setup a lot of exceptions which de
>> facto means the maintain of  statu quo. we are in the process of improvement
>> and restructuring not   in process of maintain the same situation and label
>> it differently. -avoid the "push" way. I believe that usually make the
>> opposite expected result, even me I don't like be pushed even "friendly".  -
>> reach rough consensus : easy to state , hard to achieve. the matter is not
>> to defend and advocate our proposal but find joint ones.  I agree for
>> reopening issues but I think that should be exceptional. we are a work team
>> and not a  diplomacy arena where a long negotiation predominates without
>> clear outcomes. Rafik 2009/10/11 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> I
>> would add that there is precidence for reopening issues.  In the new gTLD
>> process, several issues have been reopened.   Our goal is to get the
>> strongest possible consensus as possible.  We cannot do that by excluding
>> key view points.   Chuck From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:
>> owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Friday,
>> October 09, 2009 10:27 PM To: victoria@xxxxxxxxxx; zahid@xxxxxxxxx;
>> Glen@xxxxxxxxx; owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx; gnso-osc-csg@icann.orgSubject: 
>> Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Uniformity I am not aware of any restriction
>> about reopening an issue. Regardless, everyone in the subgroup must be given
>> the opportunity to voice their support for a position and thereby be counted
>> in the determination of rough consensus on the issue. Chuck Chuck Gomes
>> From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx To: Victoria McEvedy ; zahid@xxxxxxxxx; 
>> Glen de Saint Géry ;
>> owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx ; gnso-osc-csg Sent: Fri Oct 09 18:45:5
>>
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Zahid Jamil
>> Barrister-at-law
>> Jamil & Jamil
>> Barristers-at-law
>> 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
>> Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
>> Cell: +923008238230
>> Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
>> Fax: +92 21 5655026
>> www.jamilandjamil.com
>>
>> Notice / Disclaimer
>> This message contains confidential information and its contents are being
>> communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended
>> recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
>> Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this
>> message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may
>> contain/are the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law,
>> and constitute privileged information protected by attorney client
>> privilege. The reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of
>> any kind whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing
>> it in any medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or
>> incidentally or some other use of this communication) without prior written
>> permission and consent of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
>>
>>
>> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
>>
>
>