[lac-discuss-en] closed public comment 24 MAR 17

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond]

Dear Alberto,

ALSes and At-Large members are encouraged to respond directly to the
consultation by emailing:
comments-atlarge-review-draft-report-01feb17 at icann.org

The deadline for direct comments is 24 March 2017 23:59 UTC

But the ALAC and the RALO leaders have also prepared comments obtained
from consensus discussions. The drafts of these comments have been
circulated already. The RALO comment has taken input directly from all
RALOs including the work of the LACRALO working group and can be found here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DZLG-xM-WbyhI9LqAkS3pGZwvDjBI10h0xxYp5ChOPA/edit?usp=sharing

The ALAC Statement was drafted with several requests of input from the
community and its latest draft is attached.

I understand that now both Statements are frozen - i.e. finalised,
except if someone points out a factual error.

ALSes are encouraged to support the ALAC and the RALO Statements, but
are also encouraged to comment directly at the email above, using or not
using the template.

Kindest regards,

Olivier


On 23/03/2017 02:09, asoto at ibero-americano.org wrote:
> Estimates, as everyone knows, on 24 March 2017, close the 
>  comments p venues around the reviewedSeptember n At-Large ITEMS by the company. 
>
>
>  There were two papers entries, the first draft pages and ninety p 
>  then containing the recommendations is sixteen. 
>
>
>  The view favored this latter, it is obviously very limited without power 
>  review the first draft. 
>
>
>  Since the beginning many members of the WG, we made observations on 
>  that draft, which served to comment on the document 
>  contains recommendations is sixteen. 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  LACRALO har its inset n on these recommendations, according to what is 
>  They come off the WG, and were informed promptly to the list. 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  As recommended that each ALS or ALS pour each member of your 
>  OPINION n in the commentary p PUBLIC few minutes ago I tried. Actually 
>  Be prepared to personal comments on both documents. 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  My surprise when entering the link was that can only opinarse to a trav s 
>  form the view favored only limited to comments, and restricted to a 
>  format for review comment for comment. 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  This means that the initial draft document, which I believe contains 
>  several shortcomings and misguided claims not directly investigated 
>  in fact, it is not feasible to be observed or can be poured VIEW n 
>  on it. 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  We must remember that ning n p PUBLIC comment was restricted to a 
>  form, and less an no possibility of opinion on the document 
>  He gave rise to that form. 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  Unfortunately it is too late, this PERIOD already closed.Try the way 
>  making a general comment, not particularly about each 
>  RECOMMENDATION No, because I think it is an important limitation n our 
>  freedom of opinion. 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  The link in question: 
>  <  https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atlarge-review-draft-report-pub 
>  lic-comment-input-template-01feb17-en.pdf> 
>  https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atlarge-review-draft-report-publ 
>  ic-comment-input-template-01feb17-en.pdf 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/attachments/20170323/8ffd0be7/attachment.html>