[CCWG-ACCT] ALAC Position on Membership

[Greg Shatan]

Personhood is not the only enforceability issue. The Sole Designator would
have personhood, but would not have the same strength of powers as the Sole
Member, except with regard to the designation and removal of Board members.

On Sunday, October 18, 2015, Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com> wrote:

> Thanks
>
>
> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
>
> Virtualaw LLC
>
> 1155 F Street, NW
>
> Suite 1050
>
> Washington, DC 20004
>
> 202-559-8597/Direct
>
> 202-559-8750/Fax
>
> 202-255-6172/cell
>
>
>
> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Drazek, Keith [kdrazek at verisign.com <javascript:;>]
> Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2015 9:26 AM
> To: Phil Corwin
> Cc: James Gannon; Accountability Cross Community
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] ALAC Position on Membership
>
> The "Reference Model" is the Sole Member model included in our last report.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Oct 18, 2015, at 2:21 PM, Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >
> > Point of information:
> > I know what the member and designator‎ models are - but what is the
> reference model?
> >
> >
> > Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
> >
> > Virtualaw LLC
> >
> > 1155 F Street, NW
> >
> > Suite 1050
> >
> > Washington, DC 20004
> >
> > 202-559-8597/Direct
> >
> > 202-559-8750/Fax
> >
> > 202-255-6172/cell
> >
> >
> >
> > "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org <javascript:;> [
> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org <javascript:;>] on
> behalf of Drazek, Keith [kdrazek at verisign.com <javascript:;>]
> > Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2015 8:46 AM
> > To: James Gannon
> > Cc: Accountability Cross Community
> > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] ALAC Position on Membership
> >
> > I agree an explanation would be helpful. Particularly around the choice
> of timing.
> >
> > Keith
> >
> >> On Oct 18, 2015, at 1:43 PM, James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> Given the announcement a few moments ago that the ALAC has voted to no
> longer support the reference model as presented in the second draft, for
> those of us who were not able to be in the room I think it would be great
> if some of our ALAC participants could give a brief overview of the reason
> for this change and give us some context for this vote taken by the ALAC
> just so we are fully informed and up to speed.
> >>
> >> I don’t want to start a debate but merely would like to be better
> informed as to the reasoning and background.
> >>
> >> -James Gannon
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> >> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org <javascript:;>
> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> > _______________________________________________
> > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> > Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org <javascript:;>
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org <javascript:;>
> 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/20151018/5022bbdf/attachment.html>