[CCWG-ACCT] Carve-out issue

Fri Feb 19 23:04:56 UTC 2016

Well, NO! Actually Minus whatever it takes.

If a few of you wish to gratuitously create an international incident, before the transition has evan started, then that is your affair.
This WG is clearly not competent, professionally or diplomatically to address this issue.

The relevant negotiation is within the GAC itself, and that - I gather - will be difficult enough.

Regards

CW

On 19 Feb 2016, at 22:14, "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer at heritage.org> wrote:

> 
> +2
>  
> 
> 
> Brett Schaefer
> Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
> Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy
> The Heritage Foundation
> 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
> Washington, DC 20002
> 202-608-6097
> heritage.org
> 
> 
> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Salaets, Ken
> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 3:49 PM
> To: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Carve-out issue
>  
> +1
>  
> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of James Gannon
> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 1:21 PM
> To: Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com>; 'Phil Corwin' <psc at vlaw-dc.com>; 'Greg Shatan' <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>; 'Kavouss Arasteh' <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
> Cc: 'Thomas Rickert' <thomas at rickert.net>; accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Carve-out issue
>  
> Unless the GAC can present us with a consensus objection or some form of wholesome proposal reflecting the full breath of membership of the GAC I think we need to move forward noting the objections of the 11 GAC members.
>  
> The board is free to vote against our proposal. Do not let this 11th hour rush to push the CCWG into a corner move us from our long and hopefully fruitful journey.
>  
> -James
>  
> From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com>
> Date: Friday 19 February 2016 at 6:15 p.m.
> To: 'Phil Corwin' <psc at vlaw-dc.com>, 'Greg Shatan' <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>, 'Kavouss Arasteh' <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
> Cc: 'Thomas Rickert' <thomas at rickert.net>, "accountability-cross-community at icann.org" <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Carve-out issue
>  
> +1
>  
> Paul Rosenzweig
> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
> O: +1 (202) 547-0660
> M: +1 (202) 329-9650
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
> Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066
> Link to my PGP Key
> <image001.png>
>  
> From: Phil Corwin [mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com] 
> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 12:52 PM
> To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>; Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
> Cc: Thomas Rickert <thomas at rickert.net>; accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Carve-out issue
>  
> Greg:
>  
> Assuming that the new Board position is indeed a response to a minority position of a few GAC members, I am in full agreement that it “should serve as a warning to us all”.
>  
> Indeed, it emphasizes exactly why the GAC should not be able to block the community’s ability to hold the Board accountable for implementing GAC consensus advice that the community feels is outside the scope of the Bylaws or Mission Statement.
>  
> Best. Philip
>  
> 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
>  
> Twitter: @VlawDC
>  
> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
>  
> From:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan
> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 12:38 PM
> To: Kavouss Arasteh
> Cc: accountability-cross-community at icann.org; Thomas Rickert
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Carve-out issue
>  
> It is alarming that a few GAC members could seek to undo a carefully balanced compromise.  And even more alarming that those few GAC members could so quickly trigger a Board intervention.
>  
> The carve-out is balanced against the concerns of other stakeholders with regard to (i) the proposed supermajority threshold for Board rejection of GAC advice and (ii) the GAC's overall role as a decisional participant in the Empowered Community, rather than its traditional advisory capacity.  The carve-out itself underwent a compromise, requiring the Community to go through an IRP before exercising the power of Board recall.
>  
> When one pulls on one end of a compromise, the other end tends to move as well.
>  
> Do other stakeholders need to send countervailing warnings?  Will the Board respond as quickly? Do we want to find out?
>  
> I think this extraordinary response to a minority report should serve as a warning to us all.
>  
> Greg
>  
>  
>  
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> wrote:
> Please kindly confirm and acknowledge recipt of wanrning message
> Regards
> Kavouss
>  
> 2016-02-19 18:10 GMT+01:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>:
> Dear Co-chairs
> You have seen the concerns of 11 Governments which would certainly be echoed by other gouvernements soon.
> This is an ALARMING SITUATION ,
> If there is no consensus means there is no consensus ,
> We could not favour one community in disfavouring another one.
> Perhaps it was hoped that the people could join the consensus but it does not come up as such
> If a mistake has occurred we should repair it .
> Howmany times we have changed our concept from Voluntry Model to Sole member from Sole Member to Sole designator .
> THE ISSUE IS CRITICAL
> Pls do not rush to publish the report as being sent to the chartering organization just hold on for few more days untill your 26 feb. calls
> Try to find out some solution including going back to the initial stage of REC. 11 without no carve-out and with two options of simple majority and 2/3 theshold  and rediscuss that.
> You can not ignor the growing concerns of several governments and would certainly be further grown up soon
> Regards
> Kavouss
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> 
>  
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7303 / Virus Database: 4530/11623 - Release Date: 02/14/16
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160220/da4fa454/attachment-0001.html>