[CCWG-ACCT] Timeline and next steps (updated)

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 02:47:36PM +0000, Nigel Roberts wrote:
> These deadlines are artificial, and DESIGNED to be exclusionary, so why are
> you surprised?

With respect, I don't think it is fair to call the deadlines either
artificial or designed to be exclusionary.  In Dublin we got a very
clear count backwards from what the WG has been told is an external
deadline.

I appreciate as much as anyone the way that the extremely awkward
dates are bad for people (they're bad for me too).  But the CCWG has
made so much progress, and the IANA operational communities are all
waiting on the output from this WG.  This WG can flip over the table
of the transition, of course; but I humbly urge everyone to consider
the damage to ICANN and to this community if the transition fails on
account of the missing accountability piece.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com