Re: [gnso-osc-ops] FW: Potential Agenda Items For This Week's GCOT Call

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Eric if you have another issue you would prefer to work on, please convince us 
and move us in that direction.

I understand you think my issue is irrelevant. I don't happen to agree. I see 
it as a fundamental parity issue and those, for me, are always worth arguing to 
the last breath.

a.

On 17 Sep 2010, at 00:15, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:

> 
> Ron,
> 
> So the necessity and utility of any disclosure is what?
> 
> I can see getting a disclosure that the staffer tasked with turning WG 
> written gorp into legaleze attended a law school that had a legal writing 
> clinic and that the staffer actually took it for a grade, but why anything 
> else?
> 
> I'm afraid I don't understand the substitution of universal-isms, of SOIs, of 
> lists of contracts and contractors, of ... for solving, or at least 
> identifying, actual problems of process and structure. It is as if real 
> problems are too difficult, so hypothetical problems, made up issues, are 
> better choices for make-work.
> 
> Eric
> 
> On 9/16/10 1:52 PM, Ron Andruff wrote:
>> 
>> Eric,
>> 
>> I understand your POV, but we have already agreed that staff facilitate the
>> volunteer's work.  The do not advocate and cannot advocate on policy; their
>> only reason for participation is to facilitate volunteer's policy
>> development, i.e., turn it into proper legaleze...  That part is clear and a
>> non-issue to me.
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> 
>> RA
>> 
>> Ronald N. Andruff
>> 
>> President
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> RNA Partners, Inc.
>> 
>> 220 Fifth Avenue
>> 
>> New York, New York 10001
>> 
>> + 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
>> Behalf Of Eric Brunner-Williams
>> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 1:42 PM
>> To: Robin Gross
>> Cc: Ray Fassett; gnso-osc-ops; Avri Doria; Sam Eisner
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-ops] FW: Potential Agenda Items For This Week's GCOT
>> Call
>> 
>> 
>> So ... if a staffer has filed a SOI/DOI, and it factually discloses
>> the staffer's interest in X, is the staffer free to advocate for X,
>> and is the staffer then participating equally (overlooking the bit
>> about the staffer being paid to participate, at random locations on
>> the surface of the Earth) with the volunteers and elected (through the
>> "bottom up, consensus driven, democratic manner") representatives of
>> Stakeholder Groups, Advisory Groups, and Working Groups?
>> 
>> This is not where I want to go. We're chasing a non-problem and
>> ignoring a known problem.
>> 
>> Eric
>> 
>> 
>> 
>