[NCSG-Discuss] The Board, IGO entitlement to special protections and 28 Feb

[Avri Doria]

EEK.
Please no nose cutting.
(-;

In any case I will try to start a comment on this over the weekend and make a first draft available.
I will also add the task to the NCSG-PC task list.

thanks to those who volunteered to help.  I will be taking you up on the offer. 

avri



On 13 Feb 2013, at 21:58, Dan Krimm wrote:

> +1
> 
> This is what we feared.  No more ad hoc!!  Cut off the nose now.
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> --
> Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone and do
> not necessarily reflect any position of the author's employer.
> 
> 
> 
> At 11:53 AM +0900 2/14/13, Andrew A. Adams wrote:
>> I seem to recall that our (NCUC, perhaps not NPOC) view on the Board's
>> decision to grant IOC/ICRC protections without a PDP represented the nose of
>> the camel in the tent and that this would likely lead to an attempt by the
>> rest of the IGO community to believe that they could expect similar
>> treatment). Our prediction is coming true, and this is the rest of the camel
>> being pushed into the tent. I fully support strong efforts to push for a
>> proper measured PDP approach to solving this issue and against these ad hoc
>> special treatments for special interests.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Professor Andrew A Adams                      aaa at meiji.ac.jp
>> Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration,  and
>> Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
>> Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan       http://www.a-cubed.info/
>