[Internal-cg] Document Content and Structure

Manal Ismail manal at tra.gov.eg
Mon Jun 15 12:52:48 UTC 2015

Fair enough .. That's why I tried to reiterate how the discussion started .. 
Yes, "we are in violent agreement" :), hope with everyone else too :) !!
Kind Regards

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Karrenberg [mailto:daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net] 
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 2:46 PM
To: Manal Ismail; Milton L Mueller; IANA etc etc Coordination Group
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Document Content and Structure

In that case it appears that we are in violent agreement. The mailing list discussion and some things that were said during the most recent call increased my worry about loosing focus.


On 15.06.15 11:49 , Manal Ismail wrote:
> I think the main idea behind noting different audience, was not to produce different versions of the proposal ..
> On the contrary, the intention was to make sure things needed ONLY for the public comment period (not for NTIA), be separated and possibly posted as part of the announcement on the ICG website ..
> But I stand to be corrected ..
> Kind Regards
> --Manal
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Internal-cg [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at ianacg.org] On Behalf Of 
> Daniel Karrenberg
> Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 10:01 PM
> To: Milton L Mueller; IANA etc etc Coordination Group
> Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Document Content and Structure
> On 11.06.15 19:29 , Milton L Mueller wrote:
>> Hmmm, I missed what looks to have been an exciting meeting, so discount the following comments if they are uninformed or misinterpreting based on lack of context, but I am reacting only to Daniel K's statement:
>>> I oppose
>>> 	- producing various versions for different audiences,
>>> 	- including explanatory material not intended for NTIA, and
>>> 	- copying or paraphrasing any existing documents.
>> Daniel seems to be operating from the assumption that it is only the NTIA that will read and react to our proposal. Is he forgetting the fact that before we can send it to the NTIA we are required to have a public comment period? This proposal may well require explanations or summaries that are appropriate for a general public audience but would not be needed for the NTIA. 
> Rest assured that I am not operating from that assumption. See my message:
>> As I said on the call: we can have explanatory material such as 
>> summaries, info-graphics or even cartoons  produced that may help to 
>> socialise our deliverable and gain acceptance of it. But that is not 
>> our main job.
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org

More information about the Internal-cg mailing list