Dr Victoria Carrington wrote:
>
> To all WG-A Group Leaders and members:
[..]
>
> In view of these concerns, I have asked the ICANN Board for an extension of time to properly conclude our work, but we shouldn't assume that we will get it. For the time being, I regret that I just have to ask everyone to go forward with their subgroups and report in. I thank everyone for their efforts to date in what is undoubtedly a very difficult task.
>
Jonathan,
I have to disagree with your move. We should first try hard to get the work
done, and if we are unable to meet the deadline, ask for an extension. But we
are moree than one month far form that deadline and I see your request as
pretty premature, I do insist.
For one thing, we are not trying to "solve" these issues now. We have behind
us a long and painlfull process where most of us have already participated and
expressed our opinions. We are not an "appeal instance· for that process, nor
are we supposed to start form scratch.
I mean that most of DNBSO pariticpants positionsare well know and easy to
docmunet., What we need to do is precisely document them, see whether they
amount ot any given consensus or rough consensus, actively seek implication
form those not having participated so far (instead of encouraging you, me,
Milt, KathyK, Marilyn Cade or Mike Heltzer to repeat once agan what we think).
Finally we should draft some clear recommednations on that state of things.
I, for one, have been unable to pariticpate or coordinate any work for some
days. But this is "my" fualt, not ICANN's. So I prefer trying to sleep even
less during the next eeks that spending my time (wasting my time) arguing
about deadlines, who is and who not in each and veverey subgroup or other such
procedural niceties.,
Best regards,
Amadeu, fighting aghainst backlog