RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Regarding the Nairobi Board Resolution

["Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>]

Folks,
When Kurt sent his message to the list, I was expecting some discussion, but
frankly not to this extent.
Personally, I am not surprised at all by the answer to the questions we have
sent to the Board.
As a matter of fact, this is what I did expect when we decided to ask the
questions, and this is why I insisted in the beginning of the WG on working
without waiting for the reply to these questions. Don't get me wrong, I
believe that these were all legitimate questions, and that we did the right
thing in going on record asking them. But I also believe that if the Board
had a complete answer to how to solve the issue of vertical integration our
task would be very simple: we could disband immediately.
I believe that there is great value in what we do. We have the difficult
task to find, in a very short time, whether there is consensus in the
community on some forms of vertical integration. If we do not achieve this
goal, the Board will have to decide, and it will do it on the basis of the
Nairobi resolution. However, if we come to a large consensus even on few
specific points, the Board would be foolish in not welcoming this and not
instructing staff to include these consensus points in the DAGn.
So, I wonder whether this continuing discussion on what is the real
interpretation of the Board's text is not sidetracking us from the main
task. Up to now, we have been working hard, and made a lot of progress.
There have been different proposals and the discussion has focused on the
substantial issues. We are in the middle of the process of identifying
specific components of the different proposals, and the discussion is moving
to these components. I see an effort in understanding eachother's POV, and
looking at the Mikey/Kathy's matrix, there might be points on which we can
achieve consensus.
Can we concentrate on this, and drop subjects that could sidetrack us?
If however there are some people that have a genuine interest in exploring
further the language of the resolution and the answer given by Kurt to our
questions, maybe we can form a subgroup. That will allow this issue to be
debated without delaying the discussion on potential consensus items.
Cheers,
Roberto