Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Uniformity

["Anthony Harris" <harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I fully support Krista's comments. We should
concentrate on our work output.

Tony Harris
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Papac, Krista 
  To: zahid@xxxxxxxxx ; Rafik Dammak 
  Cc: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx ; Gomes, Chuck ; victoria@xxxxxxxxxx ; 
Glen@xxxxxxxxx ; gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 2:56 PM
  Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] Uniformity


  I agree with Zahid.  From what I have seen, the word "uniformity" is not 
used.  It is the word "common" which is used and these two words do not mean 
the same thing.  I further agree with Zahid and others that we cannot have 
"uniform" membership criteria for all constituencies.  The nature of our 
multi-stakeholder model creates diversity, and it should, that prevents 
"uniform" membership criteria from being practical or desired.

   

  I would like to add that I do not have an issue with Zahid's participation.  
I know Olga is looking into this, but wanted to make my position known.

   

  Finally, I am concerned that we are spending a lot of time debating things 
like Zahid's participation, and Chuck's role, rather than focusing on the 
intended work of this WG.  While it is important to make sure our WG is 
conducting itself in an appropriate fashion, I fear we have taken it to a level 
that is distracting and prevents progress.  

   

  I appreciate the experience and input of all members of our WG and look 
forward to continued collaboration on the final product.

   

  Best,

  Krista 

   

  **Please note my new Mobile Number 

  Krista Papac 
  Sales Executive 
  Iron Mountain Digital 
  5530 Bandini Blvd 
  Bell, CA  90201  US 
  Home Office: +1.714.846.8780 
  Mobile: +1.714.865.7655 
  Fax: +1.323.443.3573 
  krista.papac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

  Order your complimentary copy of Software Escrow for Dummies today at 
ironmountain.com/escrowfordummies

   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Zahid Jamil
  Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 10:29 AM
  To: Rafik Dammak
  Cc: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx; Gomes, Chuck; victoria@xxxxxxxxxx; 
Glen@xxxxxxxxx; gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx
  Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Uniformity

   

  Can the NCUC or its constituencies have the same criteria for membership as 
the IPC, ISPC or BC - I don't think so. 

  In any case uniformity is not language that appears anywhere. Its not in the 
board resolution nor our charter.





  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 02:25:55 +0900

  To: <zahid@xxxxxxxxx>

  Cc: <owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>; Gomes, Chuck<cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
<victoria@xxxxxxxxxx>; <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>; <gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>

  Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] Uniformity

   

  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@xxxxxxxxx Subject: 
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

   

   



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  The information contained in this email message and its attachments is 
intended only for the private and confidential use of the recipient(s) named 
above, unless the sender expressly agrees otherwise. Transmission of email over 
the Internet is not a secure communications medium. If you are requesting or 
have requested the transmittal of personal data, as defined in applicable 
privacy laws by means of email or in an attachment to email you must select a 
more secure alternate means of transmittal that supports your obligations to 
protect such personal data. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
recipient and/or you have received this email in error, you must take no action 
based on the information in this email and you are hereby notified that any 
dissemination, misuse, copying, or disclosure of this communication is strictly 
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us 
immediately by email and delete the original message.