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

Greg Shatan gregshatanipc at gmail.com
Fri Nov 13 19:36:33 UTC 2015


I didn't realize you were such a big Justin Bieber fan.  My apologies, then.

On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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/20151113/20683810/attachment.html>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list