[CCWG-ACCT] Does the proposed change to the GAC Bylaw create a new "mandatory voting requirement" for the ICANN Board?

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 06:01:37PM +0100, Mathieu Weill wrote:
> 
> I must confess I do not understand how a Board in general, and Icann’s in 
> particular, can act through anything other than a voting decision (even if 
> it can be a consensus decision, it’s still a type of vote) ?

I don't have any trouble imagining it, but perhaps this is because I
work in communities where voting is not really the main
decision-making mechanism.

For instance, I can imagine a case where some matter has come before a
group, and we have to deal with it, but initial discussion makes it
pretty clear that people are not supportive of the idea.  In such a
case, I have no trouble imagining myself asking, "Does anyone wish to
speak in _favour_ of this idea?"  If nobody speaks up, I can imagine
taking that as a pretty serious sign that there's just no support for
the idea, and anything like a formal vote isn't necessary.

Speaking as someone who sometimes has to evaluate the consensus of the
Internet Architecture Board (note I'm not speaking _for_ them), I'm
quite sure we make decisions this way pretty often.  It's not our only
way, but it's something for which I can think of examples in the past
few months.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com