[Internal-cg] Consensus call: contracting/agreements

[WUKnoben]

Ok to the text.

Wolf-Ulrich

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- 
From: Alissa Cooper
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 6:35 AM
To: Kavouss Arasteh
Cc: internal-cg at ianacg.org
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus call: contracting/agreements

Hi Kavouss,

Sure, but rather than use singular pronouns I’d like to use plural pronouns 
for the ICG since as a group we have an interest in the response, e.g.:

--

Dear Steve,

The ICG _has noted that_ it would be beneficial for the transition process 
if ICANN could clarify its position related to the statement located at 
<insert link here>. Specifically, if ICANN takes issue with provisions in 
any of the draft proposals relating to contracts or other agreements, the 
ICG requests that those opinions be made public. _You are kindly requested 
to examine the matter and inform us of your findings._

Thanks,
Alissa Cooper on behalf of the ICG

--


On May 6, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> 
wrote:

> Dear Alissa
> Thank you again for your efforts
> If everybody agrees with the course of action that you proposed I would 
> join the consensus to be emerged that you send the message on behalf of 
> ICG but with the introductory words that I have suggested as well as with 
> the closing phrase that I did suggest . These suggestions would in no way 
> change the thrust and objectives of your recent edits
> Regards
> Kavousd
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 6 May 2015, at 17:10, Alissa Cooper <alissa at cooperw.in> wrote:
>>
>> I’d like to make a consensus call on our efforts related to 
>> contracting/agreements. Below I’ve included the text of the statement to 
>> be posted to our site and the email to be sent to the ICANN board chair. 
>> I’ve seen a good deal of support for this, with some disagreement about 
>> whether the email should be sent on behalf of the ICG or not, but I’d 
>> like to make a consensus call before proceeding.
>>
>> Before May 8 at 23:59 UTC, please respond to this message to indicate 
>> whether or not you support publishing the statement and sending the email 
>> below.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alissa
>>
>>
>> Statement:
>> --------------
>>
>> ICG Statement on Contracts and Other Agreements
>>
>> As the development of the proposal for the IANA stewardship transition 
>> proceeds, operational communities have begun discussions with ICANN 
>> concerning existing and future contracts and other agreements called for 
>> in their community transition proposals. The ICG expects -- as it has 
>> from the very beginning of the transition process -- that all interested 
>> parties express their opinions about the transition proposals openly and 
>> transparently within the community processes. This includes opinions 
>> about the provisions, principles, and mechanisms associated with 
>> contracts or other agreements between the communities and the IANA 
>> functions operator. It is particularly crucial that the opinions of the 
>> proposed contracted parties be shared within the community processes as 
>> early as possible.
>>
>>
>>
>> Email to Steve Crocker:
>> -------------------------------
>>
>> Dear Steve,
>>
>> The ICG believes it would be beneficial for the transition process if 
>> ICANN could clarify its position related to the statement located at 
>> <insert link here>. Specifically, if ICANN takes issue with provisions in 
>> any of the draft proposals relating to contracts or other agreements, the 
>> ICG requests that those opinions be made public.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alissa Cooper on behalf of the ICG
>> _______________________________________________
>> Internal-cg mailing list
>> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
>> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org


_______________________________________________
Internal-cg mailing list
Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org