[CCWG-ACCT] so what is the current outcome on human rights.

Dr Eberhard W Lisse el at lisse.na
Fri Jul 31 05:31:47 UTC 2015

we don't.

In terms of the Charter need to determine whether we have Full Consensus, Consensus or enough objections to constitut No Consensus of the members appointed by the chartering AC/SOs. 

The participants do not take part in this determination and/or any related polls.

Qualifying language has the restrictive effect of excluding what is not mentioned. Hence I will only accept an unqualified requirement. 

This can go into WS2 but we then loose leverage.


Sent from Dr Lisse's iPhone 6

> On Jul 30, 2015, at 23:59, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear All
> Grec ,s proposal got 11 in favour and 8 against( those voted for Keith, s proposal)
> Keith,s proposal got 8 in favour and 11 against( those voted for Grec, s proposal)
> My proposal got 8 in favour and 4 against
> We thus need to identify the proposal that gained a more clear majority
> Kavouss    
> Sent from my iPhone
>> On 31 Jul 2015, at 07:37, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck at actonline.org> wrote:
>> Good question! The waters got muddy at the end. I appears as though there was a simple majority in favor of something being in there and, given that, a simple majority in favor of Greg's language. I don't know what that means for the draft that will go out to the public. There was talk of another poll on the listserv to capture more folks.
>> 80% sure you don't need to draft anything and Greg will need to draft an inline objection on behalf of part of the CSG....but who knows?
>> Jonathan Zuck

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150731/0dc8febd/attachment.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list