[CCWG-ACCT] RES: Stress Test 18: bylaw amendment suggestion

[Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch]

Dear Milton

there is absolute willingness as I sense it, but a minimal degree of flexibility is needed in order to avoid capture by single members or very tiny minorities in the future. We may try to seek appropriate wording which strikes the right balance.

thanks for your constructive spirit :-)

Jorge

Von meinem iPhone gesendet

Am 13.11.2015 um 07:00 schrieb Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu<mailto:milton at gatech.edu>>:

Megan and Jorge:

The communique says that it is committed to consensus, yes, but it also says that GAC can change the definition of consensus. If you have no intention or desire to change the definition of consensus, then we will all have any easy time coming to an agreement, because we can put the GAC’s current operational definition of it into the fundamental bylaws. That is what I, and most others, would consider a “clearer assurance that when we say consensus we really mean it.” So I welcome Jorge’s willingness to make such an assurance.

On the other hand if you are not willing to allow the current definition to go into the bylaws, then I am afraid we are just playing word games with the term “consensus.”

As I commented before to another email: the GAC has committed to consensus. If there is need for clearer assurances that when we say consensus we really mean it, I feel nobody in the GAC will be against to finding the right wording that makes that clear.