[CCWG-ACCT] Your public comment re replacement of IANA provider

[Avri Doria]

On 18-Sep-15 22:06, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
> Ultimately this becomes a budget question.   I am personally OK with some sort of budget for an SO or AC to be able to challenge whether the Board has followed its bylaws.   I think it needs to be capped at some amount for any given year.
>
> I guess we could stop having face-to-face public ICANN meetings, and put the savings from the travel and meetings budget into a larger budget for the community to spend on legal fees :-)     It would also force us all to be more effective at using online collaboration tools. 

Does this mean that the IRP would remain exorbitant and impossible for
regular appellants to use?

The fact that the IRP is supported by ICANN and appellants only have to
pay their own legal expenses is a major part of the solution offered on
redress in the CCWG plan. 

To have this featured laughed away as its 'redress or f2f meetings, pick
one,' is problematic.


avri

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus