[CCWG-ACCT] ICANN Board Comments on Third CCWG-Accountability Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations

[Avri Doria]

As long as the Board is not calling on GPI as their reason for
countering the community's proposals, I can agree.  But as long as they
are in a position to declare that as their reason for anything, we are
forced to deal with the issue.  The Board does not define the GPI. We
all work on understanding it together.

avri



On 26-Dec-15 18:24, Greg Shatan wrote:
> I'm very supportive of efforts to explore and define GPI within
> ICANN's remit. I hope to be involved in those efforts, which could be
> significant (at least in level of effort).
>
> But it should not be a factor in our discussions of the Board's
> comments on the the Third Draft Proposal. We are not going to achieve
> a breakthrough with the Board because we have The Definition of Global
> Public Interest.
>
> With regard to our work right now, this is a red herring.
>
> On Saturday, December 26, 2015, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On 26-Dec-15 15:58, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
>     > Are you suggesting that the PI of all nations are identical?
>
>     No.
>
>     avri
>
>     ---
>     This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>     https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>     Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org <javascript:;>
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus