[CCWG-ACCT] Recommendation 6 and a way forward to include compromise text suggested by the Board

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Sun Feb 7 19:05:23 UTC 2016


There are several possible reasons:

- The Board seems to feel strongly that it would be advisable
- It may well be that the "right" people to 
discuss a certain issue may not be the same as 
those on the current CCWG. Or may not be the ones 
with the interest, knowledge and time.
- Better opportunity to work in parallel

It may not happen, but if there is a will within 
the chartering organizations, why should it not be allowed?

But for the record, I was not necessarily 
advocating it in my reply, but trying to ensure 
that if it did end up in the proposal, that it be worded reasonably.

Alan

At 06/02/2016 12:20 PM, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
>If there is a reason for breaking the CCWG 
>charter and taking some parts of WS 2 tasks out 
>of the CCWG-accountability, I would like to know it.
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Tijani BEN JEMAA
>Executive Director
>Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)
>Phone: +216 98 330 114
>           +216 52 385 114
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>Le 5 févr. 2016 à 17:38, Alan Greenberg 
>><<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> a écrit :
>>
>>I think that we want a chartering process 
>>comparable to that of the CCWG. I presume that 
>>if a HR group were to come into existence and 
>>was not chartered by a reasonable number of 
>>orgs, then the Board would not agree to the 
>>"semi-binding" nature of the outcomes (forgive 
>>me inventing a new word to describe the 
>>CCWG-Board process previously agreed to).
>>
>>Alan
>>
>>At 05/02/2016 01:52 AM, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
>>>Hello Alan,
>>>
>>>
>>> >>  I don't understand the concept of a Cross 
>>> Community WG chartered by only one AC/SO.
>>>
>>>Good pick up.   Might be best described as 
>>>"two or more",  or "at least three" if you want a minimum threshold.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Bruce Tonkin
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>><mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>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/20160207/07e12de0/attachment.html>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list