ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Final charter proposal

  • To: "'Stéphane Van Gelder'" <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>, <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Final charter proposal
  • From: "Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 10:24:24 -0800



I do appreciate your sentiments here.  Perhaps I took Milton too seriously
and got a bit farther ?down? with my emotion re ICANN.  I clearly was not
referring to useless calls of this DT (since I?ve missed the only one), but
to WG calls in general in the many WGs that I participate on.  I am bothered
that the discussion on those calls often is not well captured, or is
selectively captured, while much of the discussion often seems ignored.  In
short, I find list-lurking to be a much better use of time in policy
development and much more inclusive of people who are busy and live in
different timezones.  But I understand that others find the calls useful,
and that is their choice.


In any event, I was not intending to downplay any volunteer efforts, as they
are in short supply and much appreciated regardless of the perspective of
the volunteers.  Many perspectives are needed in order to develop balanced
policy.  I really just didn?t like Milton?s message to me and Kristina...


C?est la vie?


Mike Rodenbaugh


tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087

http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/> 


From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 10:02 AM
To: icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Final charter proposal


I generally don?t have time for WG calls anymore, having found the costs to
far outweigh the benefits in general, largely because the discussions are
often just ignored in further written work.  So I?ll wait to see any
proposed outcomes written on the list, where they can be openly debated by
all, and not just those who have time for any particular call(s) at the
precise moment they are held.




I find your words very difficult to accept. You were the one who initiated
this PDP, against arguments made that the Council is already overworked and
would have difficulty coping with an added task. As you know, I was not in
favour of a PDP. But a vote was called and the outcome was a green light for
the PDP. Once that happened, I considered all previous arguments for or
against moot and agreed to help in any way I could. I and others on this
group have put in the time required to do the calls (only one, the second
one is now) to try and move this process forward. For you to come back like
this and call those calls useless is, at the least, very discouraging for
those of us who have gotten themselves involved in this work.



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy