[governance] FW: Letter from Senators+ on .ORG Sale

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

    	Equally I would request the co cos to ask that caucus members please post factual content to the list as emails contrary to verifiable fact seem to arouse strong passions here.
Thanks Suresh 
    	
    	

    	--srs
    
  




On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 8:03 PM +0530, "Bruna Martins dos Santos" <governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote:










Dear IGC, 

In light of some comments made regarding the exchanges present on this thread, the Co-Coordinators would like to remind our members to present their comments in a courteous and analytical way. Bearing in mind the diversity of this Caucus, it is important for us to keep on having respectful divergences while considering the different views on the matter.

Best Regards, 

Bruna Santos and Sheetal Kumar 

Le lun. 27 janv. 2020 à 17:09, <david_allen_ab63 at post.harvard.edu> a écrit :
If they were just plain statements of fact ….  Instead,
	"This is a joke.”
 	“… such a wild untruth!”
Those are insults.  NOT neutrally valanced "statements of fact.”  Insults attack the person, the definition of ad hominem.
Co-co’a take notice.
David


On Jan 27, 2020, at 12:11 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh at hserus.net> wrote:




On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 9:02 PM +0530, <david_allen_ab63 at post.harvard.edu> wrote:

Ad hominem attacks are grounds for removal from the list.
Co-co’s take notice.
David

On Jan 26, 2020, at 11:37 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:
This is a joke. You did nothing to help create jurisdictional immunity. Here is a link to the record of public comment on the final report on the jurisdiction subgroup.NCSG is there. You are not. End of story. https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/responses-comments-recommendations-on-icann-jurisdiction-20mar18-en.pdf

>I was there in most jurisdiction issue related WG meetings, including calls, and email discussions . I initiative many of the key elements of the jurisdiction issue and argued extensively about most of them. In the end there were two dissenting notes to the final jurisdiction related report which did not agree that enough was done to remove/ reduce US jurisdiction over ICANN, Brazil government's and mine.  . Can we now get back to what NCUC was doing about removing/ reducing US jurisdiction over ICANN?

parminder 

 

     Julf 

---To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>---
To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>



---

To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>

List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>



-- 
Bruna Martins dos Santos 
Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
@boomartins






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20200129/4dfd491b/attachment.htm>