[Internal-cg] Continuing / Re-Chartering Thoughts

[Lynn St.Amour]

I also support this way forward.

Lynn

On Oct 19, 2015, at 12:33 PM, "Subrenat, Jean-Jacques" <jjs at dyalog.net> wrote:

> Alissa,
> 
> initially I supported the idea of sending a single message to all the communities we represent. But your suggestion has the advantage of keeping things informal, the equivalent of our "getting the temperature of the room". I would therefore support it.
> 
> If your proposal was not accepted by a majority of colleagues, I would then insist that there be a single message to all our communities.
> 
> Thanks.
> Jean-Jacques.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Mail original -----
> De: "Alissa Cooper" <alissa at cooperw.in>
> À: "Daniel Karrenberg" <daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net>
> Cc: internal-cg at ianacg.org
> Envoyé: Lundi 19 Octobre 2015 17:23:14
> Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Continuing / Re-Chartering Thoughts
> 
> I don’t see a need to craft a specific question and send that question to each community. We were each sent to the ICG from a particular community. Those who think their communities have an interest in this could go consult with our communities, we could set a deadline, and then have a conversation about it after the deadline. This is my basic understanding of what ISOC has done — their position was reflected in their public comments and Narelle has been putting it forth to us. 
> 
>> On Oct 19, 2015, at 4:40 PM, Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net> wrote:
>> 
>> I did not hear universal support for actively reaching out. I heard some
>> people say explicitly that the initiative should not come from us. I for
>> one find such outreach rather pathetic and weakening our credibility. If
>> I am the really only one then fine. So if noone else speaks up I will
>> drop that particular point.
>> 
>> Daniel
>> 
>> On 19.10.15 10:30 , joseph alhadeff wrote:
>>> Daniel:
>>> 
>>> I think the concept was that we could reach out to see if an
>>> implementation role for us was needed, with Jean-Jacques suggesting it
>>> needed to be a canvass of all communities, not just OCs.   I concur that
>>> the validation of implementation work had to be external, not
>>> self-determined.
>>> 
>>> Joe
>>> 
>>> On 10/18/2015 9:22 AM, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On 18.10.15 14:50 , Subrenat, Jean-Jacques wrote:
>>>>> ... in this morning's discussion I felt there was a majority view in
>>>>> favour of reaching out to our communities. ...
>>>> It did not feel like that to me. I heard quite a few people say that the
>>>> initiative would have to come from outside. I listened quite carefully
>>>> even though I admit to be handicapped by not being in the room.
>>>> 
>>>> Daniel
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org