[CCWG-ACCT] Proposed agenda for CCWG ACCT Review of Draft Bylaws Meeting | Thursday, 7 April 2016 @ 12:00 UTC

[Kavouss Arasteh]

Dear Mathieu
Thanks for reply
As I mentioned two things are absolutely necessary to be discussed at today,s meeting
1 working method
2 Approach by which the draft prepared
Irrespective of lawyers certificate WE , the CCWG who wrote the text are the sole eligible entity to 
Verify the draft PARAGRAPH BY PARAGRAPH
WE ARE RESPONSIBLE TO CERTIFY ABD NOT PAID LAWYERS WHOM I FO NOT KNOW.
Read carefully the testimony which is the origin of this doubt
Regards
Kavousd
 


Sent from my iPhone

> On 7 Apr 2016, at 08:26, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr> wrote:
> 
> Dear Kavouss,
>  
> As a reminder, we have agreed that this detailed verification will be undertaken by our lawyers, once we have answered their questions. The legal team will then provide us with a certification that the Bylaws address each of the Recommendation. We are not there yet, but getting closer.
>  
> Best
> Mathieu
>  
> De : Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com] 
> Envoyé : mercredi 6 avril 2016 23:37
> À : Mathieu Weill; Thomas Rickert; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Thomas.Schneider at bakom.admin.ch; gac at gac.icann.org; <gac-leadership at icann.org>
> Cc : MSSI Secretariat; CCWG-Accountability
> Objet : Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Proposed agenda for CCWG ACCT Review of Draft Bylaws Meeting | Thursday, 7 April 2016 @ 12:00 UTC
>  
> Dear Co -Chair,
> We need to establish a working method on how to verify  the Draft Bylaws to ensure their consistencies with the corresponding Recommendations from legal and accuracy point of view$
> The only way would be a paragraph by paragraph verification
> Regards
> Kavouss
>  
> 2016-04-06 17:46 GMT+02:00 Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>:
> Dear Co-Chairs,
> 
> On item 2 of the Agenda, you'd indicate during the call yesterday (it was also reflected in the notes) that responses to some of the questions and rationale will be provided.
> 
> I strongly suggest that these responses be provided in the next few hours (since we have exceeded a 24hrs window). It will be good that we have those drafts so some of us who may not attend (or may be audio only) can comment appropriately.
> 
> I am saying all these because it's been a practice in the past that decisions are made on second reading...
> 
> Regards
> Sent from my LG G4
> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
> 
> On 6 Apr 2016 1:34 p.m., "MSSI Secretariat" <mssi-secretariat at icann.org> wrote:
> <image001.gif>
> Dear All,
> In preparation for your call CCWG Accountability Review of Draft Bylaws Meeting  – Thursday, 7 April at 12:00 – 14:00 (time converter), see below a proposed agenda:
>       Proposed Agenda:
> 1. Opening Remarks
> 2. Second reading of question responses agreed on previous call
> 3. Resolution of remaining questions *
> 4. Next Steps
> 5. ICANN 56 - Helsinki
> 6.  AOB
>  
> * SAVE THE DATE, if needed, to complete Review of Bylaws:  Saturday, 9 April @ 04:00 (AM)UTC
>  
> Timeline reminder:  13 April – members of CCWG, CWG, Bylaws Coordination Group, Board and ICG to complete review of these DRAFT BYLAWS and provide feedback to legal teams
>  
> Documents for call:  See wiki page here
>  
> Adobe Connect: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/accountability/
>  
> Thank you!
> Kind regards,
> Brenda
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160407/80df0a8e/attachment-0001.html>