[governance] Choice of addressee(s) (was Re: CONSENSUS CALL Re: Draft letter text)

[avri doria]

Hi 

My impression is that the two of them, Brazil and ICANN, are the  ones informing the world of something they are initiating together.

Similar to situations where, .e.g. the ITU and the UAE put a meeting together. 

avri

Sent from a T-Mobile 4G LTE Device

-------- Original message --------
From: michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> 
Date: 10/12/2013  19:58  (GMT-05:00) 
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org,'Avri Doria' <avri at ella.com> 
Subject: RE: [governance] Choice of addressee(s) (was Re: CONSENSUS CALL Re: Draft letter text) 
 
Avri,

The announcement/invitation to which we replied was issued by Ms.
Rousseff/Brazil.  A cc: to Chehahde/ICANN acknowledges their contribution
involvement as per the body of the note.  Are you making some
other/political point as per your note below and if so, perhaps you could be
explicit about it?

M

-----Original Message-----
From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
[mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2013 11:52 AM
To: IGC
Subject: Re: [governance] Choice of addressee(s) (was Re: CONSENSUS CALL Re:
Draft letter text)

Hi,

I wasn't thinking of a carbon copy being sent to him.  I was speaking about
addressing it to the pair of them equally as  the senior members of their
respective stakeholder groups.

Ie. To the venerable ... and the most excellent ...  (or whatever the
appropriate honorifics might be for this occasion). I do not have a view as
to which protocol would require putting first in the list of honorifics.

avri

On 12 Oct 2013, at 13:58, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:

> FWIW: I would CC Fadi. It cannot hurt, and might help.
> 
> On 12 Oct 2013, at 19:40, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
> 
>> Avri Doria <avri at ella.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> If something is sent, shouldn't it be address to both of the leaders 
>>> who came out together for this. Don't we lessen the multi 
>>> stakeholder push while petitioning for CS to be included?  Shouldn't 
>>> we be addressing our thoughts to both of them.
>>> 
>>> On sending something at all: while I believe it would be better to 
>>> wait until we have something contentful to write, I am not so 
>>> against sending boilerplate that I would object to IGC adding its 
>>> signature to an appropriately addressed note.
>> 
>> I don't see anything inappropriate about addressing this note to the 
>> Brazilian government.
>> 
>> If CS doesn't get included, it wouldn't be the fault of Fadi or of 
>> anyone else at ICANN. ICANN is not in the habit of excluding 
>> stakeholders, but governments have that habit. It would be the fault 
>> of some government bureaucrat(s) either acting on (bad) habit, or 
>> acting out of an unhealthy relationship with telecom companies that 
>> still have a pre-Internet mindset, or acting of of such a 
>> pre-Internet telecom mindset they may have themselves.
>> 
>> So it is in my view quite appropriate to communicate to the person 
>> who is able to solve this problem by simply telling her bureaucrats 
>> to work with civil society.
>> 
>> I don't like the idea of adding Fadi to the list of addressees for 
>> this particular letter, because doing so would reduce the clarity 
>> about who needs to take the necessary action to ensure the inclusion 
>> of civil society.
>> 
>> I do however agree on the point that there is an imbalance if we 
>> express appreciation only for the Brazilian president and government 
>> but not for the (at least in my view) at least equally significant 
>> contribution of Fadi.
>> 
>> How about addressing a separate note to Fadi which simply expresses 
>> appreciation?
>> 
>> If we want to take that route, it might be best to combine the 
>> endorsements / sign-on process for both letters, making it a package 
>> deal, i.e. each person or organization would either endorse both or 
>> none of the two letters.
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> Greetings,
>> Norbert
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>    governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>    http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>> 
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>    http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>    http://www.igcaucus.org/
>> 
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20131012/44b912a4/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t