[CCWG-ACCT] [WP1] Revised draft - Voting weights in community mechanism
ceo at auda.org.au
Thu Jul 30 03:13:01 UTC 2015
> Did that ever happen or is that even conceivable ?
I don’t think it has happened but it’s not inconceivable and we need to allow for the possibility IMO.
Also, note that a block may be achieved by blocking a by-law change that is necessary for the implementation of policy.
Further, under the current plans there is nothing to prevent the other SOs/ACs blocking a change to the by-law under which each of the SOs and ACs operates. I’d argue that a change to the ccNSO by-law as a result, for example, of a review of the ccNSO would be a matter for ‘approval’ by the ccNSO and not something that should be blockable by the other SOs or ACs.
To avoid any misunderstanding, I am NOT attempting to use this as way of hi-jacking the concept of blocking by-law changes but rather raising the matter to ensure we cover all bases. Are the SOs and ACs happy to have changes to the by-laws(s) by which they operate open to block by others ? If yes, so be it. If no, then we need a way around that.
> On 29 Jul 2015, at 23:52 , Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr> wrote:
> Thank you Chris, that's very useful and I can understand.
> However that veto on the "extremely narrow band of global policies for ccTLDs" would only be possible if the policy also implied a Bylaw change. Did that ever happen or is that even conceivable ? IDN ccTLD Fast track or Framework of Interpretation did not I believe.
> You have more experience than me on that.
> Le 29/07/2015 14:38, Chris Disspain a écrit :
>> Well, here I am prepared to express an opinion. The ccNSO policy by-law is clearly written and sets out the basis upon which ccNSO policy can be dealt with by the Board. There is a requirement for the ccNSO to involve the other relevant ICANN bodies in its policy making. The idea that the extremely narrow band of global policies for ccTLDs that may be undertaken by the ccNSO in accordance with the carefully crafted and politically balanced methodologies that have been created could, in essence, be blocked by other SOs and ACs is totally unacceptable to auDA and I suspect would be unacceptable to a number of my ccTLD colleagues.
> Mathieu WEILL
> AFNIC - directeur général
> Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06
> mathieu.weill at afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>
> Twitter : @mathieuweill
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community