[CCWG-ACCT] CCWG - Draft Update document for CCWG call

Fri Nov 13 19:34:22 UTC 2015

Well you started the scenario painting in the first place so I had the
share of your insult as well. If the same person raise petition through
multiple SO/AC and survives the internal processes of those SO/AC to remove
their respective individual members then such person deserves the next
Ethos award.

If you think the SO/AC community could be so drunk/distracted by
approving/supporting such petition then maybe it's another reason why
allowing appointing SO/AC remove her board member is flawed.

Regards

Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 13 Nov 2015 19:53, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:

> Perhaps you want the role to be restricted to leaders of SO/AC so Greg as
>> the president of IPC can be the only one within IPC to raise such petition.
>> Sorry that won't be implementing the concept of MS and I thought you do
>> value that.
>
>
> I did not in any way express or imply such an absurd thing, and I'm
> rather insulted that you would even raise the possibility.  Perhaps you
> will find a way to join the few SO/ACs you haven't yet joined, so that you
> can raise a petition wherever you feel like it, even if the right is
> restricted.
>
>   That seems like a much better plan for world domination, with much less
> work, than chairing a constituency.
>
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Since you have the understanding below then that is correct and there is
>> noting wrong with that; The petition only becomes recognised as legitimate
>> when the SO/AC owns it.
>>
>> I don't see what the issue is in that scenario, an individual (or group
>> of people) raise a need, it goes through the particular SO/AC consideration
>> processes and becomes a formal petition of the concerned SO/AC.
>>
>> Perhaps you want the role to be restricted to leaders of SO/AC so Greg as
>> the president of IPC can be the only one within IPC to raise such petition.
>> Sorry that won't be implementing the concept of MS and I thought you do
>> value that.
>>
>> Regards
>> Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>> On 13 Nov 2015 19:25, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't believe Page 18 addresses my concerns.  It says:
>>>
>>> The petition can only be started in the SO or AC that nominated the
>>> Director.
>>>
>>> It does not limit who can start that petition.  As such, Justin Bieber could
>>> start a petition (or Seun Ojedeji -- oops I see you are are member of
>>> NCSG (along with ALAC and the ASO) so you could start a petition almost
>>> anywhere regardless of restrictions) in the GNSO to remove Bruce Tonkin (a
>>> GNSO-appointed Director).  So, my concern stands.....
>>>
>>> If there's something I'm missing on page 18, please let me know.
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
>>>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>>>> On 13 Nov 2015 18:08, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > A few quick comments, since that's all there's time for under this
>>>> plan.  I was only able to review my prior comments against this draft; no
>>>> time for a full read.
>>>> >
>>>> > 1. Page 11: Petition Process: Is it clear that any individual,
>>>> regardless of affiliation can begin a petition in any AC/SO for every
>>>> power? Even removing that AC/SO's appointed director? For example, can
>>>> Justin Bieber start a petition in the GNSO to remove Bruce Tonkin?  If that
>>>> is what we agreed to, never mind.  It just strikes me as odd, and I haven't
>>>> seen it expressed this way before. (I think we used the passive voice
>>>> before, which did not identify the "actor" or any limitation on their
>>>> identity or affiliation.)
>>>> >
>>>> SO: Page 18 addresses your fears.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers!
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Mathieu Weill <
>>>> mathieu.weill at afnic.fr> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Dear Sabine,
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I think that this is version issue. The version of the document you
>>>> are referencing is the incorrect one.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Indeed, it was part of the transparency issues mentioned in Dublin
>>>> and, during the CCWG call #65 we specifically discussed the item (see the
>>>> slides here :
>>>> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/56144581/WP2%20Issues%202%20Nov%202015.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1446529282000&api=v2)
>>>> and acknowledged that there we had received several requests to address
>>>> this issue in WS2.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Thank you for raising this consistency issue.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Best,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Mathieu
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> De : accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
>>>> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] De la part de
>>>> Sabine.Meyer at bmwi.bund.de
>>>> >> Envoyé : vendredi 13 novembre 2015 15:01
>>>> >> À : turcotte.bernard at gmail.com
>>>> >> Cc : accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>> >> Objet : Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG - Draft Update document for CCWG call
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Dear Bernard,
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> thank you for updating and re-sending the draft!
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> To my understanding, the list of WS2 items on p 29 does not yet
>>>> reflect the current status of discussions if indeed the latest version is
>>>> the following:
>>>> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/50823981/AJed%2020151026%20Items%20for%20Consideration%20in%20Work%20Stream%202.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1446576372000&api=v2
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> In that case, “ICANN’s interaction with governments” is currently
>>>> not part of the draft.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Thank you for considering this.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Kind regards
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Sabine Meyer
>>>> >>
>>>> >> International Digital and Postal Policy, Internet Governance
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Villemombler Strasse 76, 53123 Bonn
>>>> >>
>>>> >> GERMANY
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Phone: +49 228 99615-2948
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Fax: + 49 228 99615-2964
>>>> >>
>>>> >> E-Mail: sabine.meyer at bmwi.bund.de
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Internet: http://www.bmwi.de
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
>>>> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] Im Auftrag von
>>>> Bernard Turcotte
>>>> >> Gesendet: Freitag, 13. November 2015 00:04
>>>> >> An: Accountability Cross Community
>>>> >> Betreff: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG - Draft Update document for CCWG call
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> All,
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> As per Mathieu's email of earlier today please find the draft
>>>> Proposal Update document which will be discussed at the next CCWG meeting.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The document is going to professional formatting as we speak - so
>>>> any issues of layout, fonts etc. will be addressed by a specialist.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> This document also represents a consideration of all the comments
>>>> received with respect to the previous version - not that all of these were
>>>> accepted, but a majority were taken on.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> We apologize for the lateness of the document, but as you will
>>>> notice we have put significant efforts into recasting this per the comments.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Bernard Turcotte
>>>> >>
>>>> >> ICANN Staff Support for the CCWG
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> for the CCWG Co-chairs.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>> >> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > 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/20151113/e44198fa/attachment-0001.html>