[CCWG-ACCT] Separability process and role of community in decisions (was Re: Separability: picture of the relation of CWG's IFR & SCWG with CCWG process)

[Kavouss Arasteh]

Dear Jordan and Avri
,
Dear All,
For the first part of the Question , who draft separation Bylaws?
My suggestion is CWG start and sends its finding to CCWG
For the second part of the question, we need to formally seek the views of
the Board ( not individual Board but the entire Board)
on the Process  . My suggestion would be  to start with a co-decision
making., If wWe could handle the case in a murually acceptable manner with
the Board after being informed of their views in a formal manner through a
Note from Co-Chair .
But if there is divergence, then we prefer that the last words to be given
by CCWG ,i.e.,the Board start to decide and then CCWG consider the matter
and make final decision ,as appropriate
Regards
Kavouss

2015-11-05 5:24 GMT+01:00 Jordan Carter <jordan at internetnz.net.nz>:

> hi all, hi Avri
>
> Thanks for these diagrams, which I've had another look at today. I was
> drawn back to them because one of the "not closed" things in my mind is the
> role of the community as a decision-maker at the final approval stage of a
> transition of the Names IANA Functions - if that is recommended by a
> Special IFR.
>
> My reading of the CWG-Names final proposal is that the group was after a
> co-decision process - that both the ICANN Board, and the community
> organised through some mechanism, would have to approve separation before
> it could be done. This is similar to the approach we have used for changes
> to Fundamental Bylaws.
>
> I think with the Community Mechanism we have the vehicle to make the
> Community part of the co-decision.  And through independent review of Board
> decisions or non-decisions, we have some tools as a community to deal with
> a Board part of the co-decision with which we don't agree.
>
> If people agree with this co-decision approach, my remaining question is
> which group is drafting the relevant bylaws - us, or the CWG.
>
> If people think actually there is meant to be a separate Community
> decision after the Board decision, they should say so now...
>
> Also, I wonder if the same sort of co-decision process is required for the
> formation of a Special IFR. My thought is not, consistent with Avri's
> slides. But keen on others' thoughts.
>
>
> cheers
> Jordan
>
>
> On 28 October 2015 at 07:38, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have attempted to draw up a discussion set of slides on the connection
>> between the CWG process for Separability and the CCWG accountability
>> and  enforcement measures.
>>
>> The drive doc is open for comments:
>>
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1kmDLv0yF41lb9OBlCKnl6o3TMps6AlTF8Njso5zcW9w/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> I have also attached a PDF.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151105/699ce32d/attachment.html>