RE: [gnso-osc] Another Attempt at a Final Response to the CCT

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Referring them to the email archive may be a good idea.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 10:27 AM
> To: gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Scott Pinzon
> Subject: Re: [gnso-osc] Another Attempt at a Final Response to the CCT
> 
> 
> hi,
> 
> I am fine with sending it to them.
> 
> I suggested changes, but did not mean to hold thing up.
> 
> I think they can also be referred to the email archive on the 
> topic (if they haven't been reading it already)
> 
> a.
> 
> On 7 Dec 2009, at 16:16, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> 
> > Would it suffice to simply call attention to Postel's theorem for 
> > consideration by the CCT?
> > 
> > I think it is important to get a response back to the CCT. We have 
> > spent enough time on this one point. The discussion has 
> been good but 
> > we could keep going on and in the meantime we have not responded to 
> > the CCT.  I want to wrap this up today or tomorrow at the 
> latest and 
> > will propose a way to do that later today that hopefully is 
> acceptable to all.
> > 
> > Chuck
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> >> Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2009 11:16 AM
> >> To: gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
> >> Cc: Scott Pinzon
> >> Subject: Re: [gnso-osc] Another Attempt at a Final Response to the 
> >> CCT
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Hi,
> >> 
> >> I guess that points to my problem.  
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Civility is something that people think is due to them. I.e. 
> >> People should treat me with civility or else i will 
> complain to the 
> >> ombudsman.
> >> 
> >> The problem being that civility is defined within a 
> cultural milieu.  
> >> And as most things in ICANN the rules are not easily learned.
> >> 
> >> Tolerance on the other hand means accepting it, even when someone 
> >> treats me with what i consider incivility.  Tolerance 
> transcends the 
> >> cultural limitation of civility.
> >> 
> >> Yes we should treat people with civility and should teach this by 
> >> example and without the threatened whip of an ombudsman as the 
> >> bogeyman who will get us if we behave with
> >> what seems to be incivility by someone.    Bringing the 
> >> ombudsman into the internal operations of the volunteer 
> corps seems 
> >> to me to be a really bad idea.
> >> 
> >> But more importantly, we should behave with tolerance 
> where we remain 
> >> civil even someone seems to treat us badly.
> >> 
> >> As I said, I go back to the variant of Postel's theorem as the 
> >> driving mantra for ICANN - be conservative in what you send and 
> >> liberal in what you accept, i.e. be civil but tolerant.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> a.
> >> 
> >> On 6 Dec 2009, at 16:28, Vanda UOL wrote:
> >> 
> >>> For me, both, explicitly have tolerance included or just
> >> rely on the Ombudsman office will work. The most important 
> thing is 
> >> really improve the level of civility in writing/F2F or telephone 
> >> communication or we will face a drop of participation in ICANN 
> >> challenging our capacity to accomplish AoC.
> >>> Best
> >>> 
> >>> <image001.jpg>
> >>> Vanda Scartezini
> >>> Polo Consultores Associados
> >>> Alameda Santos 1470 #1407
> >>> Tel - +55.11.3266.6253
> >>> Mob- +55.11.8181.1464
> >>> vanda@xxxxxxxxxx
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> From: owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> >>> Behalf Of Ken Bour
> >>> Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 3:57 PM
> >>> To: gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
> >>> Cc: 'Scott Pinzon'
> >>> Subject: [gnso-osc] Another Attempt at a Final Response to the CCT
> >>> 
> >>> OSC Members:
> >>> 
> >>> In the interest of continuing to make progress on the CCT
> >> letter, I reinserted paragraph 4(a) and, following Chuck's 
> original 
> >> suggestion, noted that the OSC is not unanimous on this 
> >> recommendation (see below).  All other edits were accepted and 
> >> comments removed (clean version attached).
> >>> 
> >>> For ease of reference, my suggested modification to 4(a)
> >> follows... is this language be acceptable to everyone?
> >>> a)      Executive Summary Recommendations (last bullet 
> >> point) and 2.5.7 Degradation in Civility
> >>> Recommendation:  "Encourage the understanding of opposing
> >> perspectives, while maintaining a spirit of cooperation 
> and civility"
> >>> Comment:  Civility is clearly called for in ICANN's
> >> Expected Standards of Behavior (see Section F); however, as the 
> >> organization begins to incorporate more diverse cultures, some 
> >> members of the OSC believe that increasing our tolerance 
> of others is 
> >> also important.  Would the CCT consider a modification to the 
> >> recommendation, such as, "...maintaining a spirit of cooperation, 
> >> civility and tolerance"?  Note: The OSC is not unanimous on this 
> >> recommendation.  While some members would like to see "tolerance" 
> >> added explicitly, others believe that the ICANN code 
> satisfactorily 
> >> embraces this concept (e.g. third bullet beginning with TREAT) and 
> >> that the GNSO should adopt the standards as written or 
> seek to have 
> >> them amended officially by working through the ICANN Ombudsman 
> >> office.
> >>> 
> >>> Ken Bour
> >>> 
> >>> From: owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> >>> Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 9:16 AM
> >>> To: gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
> >>> Subject: FW: [gnso-osc] Final response to the CCT
> >>> 
> >>> Chuck, yes indeed  apologies.
> >>> It should read:
> >>> Robin,
> >>> I do not understand your comment that the Ombudsman
> >> principles fail to address tolerance.
> >>> See below especially paragraphs I've highlighted in blue
> >> (bullet 3,4, 5 and 6).Isn't bullet 3 a definition of tolerance?
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 3:08 PM
> >>> To: Philip Sheppard; gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
> >>> Subject: RE: [gnso-osc] Final response to the CCT
> >>> 
> >>> Philip,
> >>> 
> >>> Did you man bullet 3?
> >>> 
> >>> Chuck
> >>> 
> >>> From: owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> >>> Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 4:07 AM
> >>> To: gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx
> >>> Subject: RE: [gnso-osc] Final response to the CCT
> >>> 
> >>> Robin,
> >>> I do not understand your comment that the Ombudsman
> >> principles fail to address tolerance.
> >>> See below especially paragraphs I've highlighted in blue
> >> (bullet 4,5, 6 and 7).Isn't bullet 4 a definition of tolerance?
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >> 
> http://www.icann.org/en/transparency/acct-trans-frameworks-principles
> >> -
> >>> 10jan08.pdf
> >>> Philip
> >>> -----------------------
> >>> F. ICANN EXPECTED STANDARDS OF BEHAVIOR Those who take part
> >> in ICANN
> >>> multi-stakeholder process including Board, staff and all those 
> >>> involved in Supporting Organization and Advisory Committee
> >> councils undertake to:
> >>> * Act in accordance with ICANN's Bylaws. In particular,
> >> participants
> >>> undertake to act within the mission of ICANN and in the
> >> spirit of the values contained in the Bylaws.
> >>> * Adhere to the conflict of interest policy laid out in 
> the Bylaws.
> >>> * Treat all members of the ICANN community equally, 
> irrespective of 
> >>> nationality, gender, racial or ethnic origin, religion or 
> beliefs, 
> >>> disability, age, or sexual orientation; members of the
> >> ICANN community should treat each other with civility both face to 
> >> face and online.
> >>> * Act in a reasonable and informed manner when
> >> participating in policy
> >>> development and decision-making processes. This includes 
> regularly 
> >>> attending all scheduled meetings and exercising independent
> >> judgment
> >>> based solely on what is in the overall best interest of
> >> Internet users
> >>> and the stability and security of the Internet's system of unique 
> >>> identifiers, irrespective of personal interests and the
> >> interests of the entity to which an individual might owe their 
> >> appointment.
> >>> * Listen to the views of all stakeholders when considering policy 
> >>> issues. ICANN is a unique multi-stakeholder environment. 
> Those who 
> >>> take part in the ICANN process must acknowledge the
> >> importance of all stakeholders and seek to understand 
> their points of 
> >> view.
> >>> * Work to build consensus with other stakeholders in 
> order to find 
> >>> solutions to the issues that fall within the areas of ICANN's 
> >>> responsibility. The ICANN model is based on a bottom-up, 
> consensus 
> >>> driven approach to policy development. Those who take part in the 
> >>> ICANN process must take responsibility for ensuring the
> >> success of the model by trying to build consensus with other 
> >> participants.
> >>> * Act in accordance with ICANN policies.
> >>> * Protect the organization's assets and ensure their
> >> efficient and effective use.
> >>> * Act fairly and in good faith with other participants in
> >> the ICANN process.
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> 
> 
>