[CCWG-ACCT] Where do we stand? (Was Re: Blog post on the Accountability work headed to Dublin)
Chartier, Mike S
mike.s.chartier at intel.com
Sat Oct 10 19:37:28 UTC 2015
+1
> On Oct 10, 2015, at 3:32 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> (I know this was addressed to the co-chairs and i am not one, yet I
> presume to have an opinion on the subject)
>
> As far as I understood we are, in parallel:
>
> a. analyzing and trying to respond to the comments, including those by
> the Board, made about defects in explanation and design in the SM model
> of Draft 2
> b. analyzing the MEM counter proposal made by the Board
>
> I disagree with your claim that working on the SM model is impractical.
> It is still the model that responds to the largest number of community
> concerns and best meets the CWG requirements.
>
> The suggestion by Steve D. is just that, a suggestion. I do not believe
> that there is a consensus in the group, at least not yet, about taking
> that path. Many, myself among them, have argued that we are not
> comfortable with putting off the major accountability changes that are
> required by the loss of NTIA. Yes, we need to prune and make sure that
> the changes we work on are necessary for WS1, but given the
> uncertainties about the post transition and any possible WS2, we must
> make sure that the WS1 solution is sufficient.
>
> avri
>
>
>> On 10-Oct-15 14:53, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
>>
>> Dear Co-Chairs,
>>
>> FWIW, I think at this point, it will be good to have an understanding
>> of where we are heading from the Co-Chairs. In some discussions it
>> seem we have understood and agreed that a model that implies a
>> structural change is impractical during this transition phase hence
>> the suggestion made by Steve.
>>
>> Yet in other discussions it seem we are going ahead with the
>> structural change model irrespective of the concerns raised from parts
>> of the community and board.
>>
>> In other to prepare towards Dublin and contribute in a meaningful way,
>> I think a summary of where we are presently and what is expected to be
>> achieved in Dublin will be helpful. I apologise if this has already
>> been shared, and in that case a pointer will be appreciated.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>>
>> On 10 Oct 2015 19:37, "Stephen Deerhake" <sdeerhake at nic.as
>> <mailto:sdeerhake at nic.as>> wrote:
>>
>> Paul,
>>
>> Perhaps the Board chair is articulating a minority viewpoint?
>> Afterall, the
>> Board will have to vote on the matter of sending/not sending the
>> output of
>> the CCWG on to NTIA.
>>
>> Stephen Deerhake
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] On
>> Behalf Of Paul
>> Rosenzweig
>> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2015 6:05 AM
>> To: 'Bruce Tonkin' <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au
>> <mailto:Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>>; 'Accountability Cross
>> Community' <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Blog post on the Accountability work
>> headed to
>> Dublin
>>
>> With respect Bruce, I share Anne's view that this is not
>> accurate. The
>> Board chair has stated unequivocally that the Board will not submit a
>> Membership based proposal. That is contrary to the statement that
>> the Board
>> will submit any proposal it receives from the CCWG "as is." That is
>> categorically ruling out one type of "as is" proposal.
>>
>> If you are seriously telling me that even after all this back and
>> forth the
>> Board actually would submit a "Membership only" based proposal to
>> the NTIA
>> then I would respectfully say that the Board has done a very poor
>> job of
>> communicating.
>>
>> So ... answer this question please as directly as you are
>> willing: If,
>> today, the CCWG having considered but declined to accept the
>> Board's input
>> were to submit a proposal based upon a Membership organization
>> would the
>> Board transmit it to the NTIA as the ICANN proposal?
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> Paul Rosenzweig
>> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
>> <mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com>
>> O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20547-0660>
>> M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20329-9650>
>> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20738-1739>
>> Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066
>> Link to my PGP Key
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au
>> <mailto:Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>]
>> Sent: Friday, October 9, 2015 10:03 PM
>> To: 'Accountability Cross Community'
>> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Blog post on the Accountability work
>> headed to
>> Dublin
>>
>> Hello Paul,
>>
>> Regarding:
>>
>> https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2015-02-12-en
>>
>> The statement still holds.
>>
>> The Board has provided input on a draft document so far, and has
>> stated all
>> along that it would raise any concerns along the way and not wait
>> for a
>> final proposal to raise any concerns.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bruce Tonkin
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> <mailto: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
>> <mailto: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
>> <mailto: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
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list