[CCWG-ACCT] Recommendation 11, 2/3 board threshold, GAC consensus, and finishing

[Kavouss Arasteh]

Malcolm
I have no problem to just Lower the threshold but NOT excluding GAC from exercising its community power when an IRP is invoked in regard with GAC advice and at the same time lower the threshold from 2/3 to 60%
Regards
Kavouss      

Sent from my iPhone

> On 2 Feb 2016, at 16:17, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm at linx.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 02/02/2016 14:26, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>>> The addition of the following text might help allieviate that concern:
>>> 
>>> "This clause does not create a presumption that the Board shall accept
>>> such advice, or change the criteria for how it shall be evaluated."
>> 
>> I'm a little uncomfortable with all the ways the document keeps
>> growing descriptions of what it is not.
> 
> Fair enough. I'm sure it can be stated in a positive fashion; I didn't
> expect this to be final bylaws text anyway.
> 
> Can we agree the principle that we're only changing the voting threshold
> and not trying to create a new presumption of obedience, and leave it to
> the lawyers to come up with the best language to avoid any unintended
> consequences?
> 
> Malcolm.
> 
> -- 
>            Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523
>   Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog
> London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/
> 
>                 London Internet Exchange Ltd
>       Monument Place, 24 Monument Street, London EC3R 8AJ
> 
>         Company Registered in England No. 3137929
>       Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community