[CCWG-ACCT] further responses to ICANN
Becky.Burr at neustar.biz
Mon Feb 22 14:21:51 UTC 2016
My further responses inline
Thank you very much for your replies.
However, I feel we should separate intentions from facts in such replies and/or clarifications.
In this regard, although only 0.1% (in your estimation) of the instances the carve-out would apply are those where the Board decision is consistent with the Bylaws, the fact is that the carve-out rule makes no such distinction, correct?
Correct, that distinction is not made in the context of any of the community powers and was not made in the GAC carve-out context until the Board’s recent intervention.
As to the participation of any other SO and AC on both tracks, I kindly asked to confirm a fact (that any other SO or AC may fully participate, with the only exception pf the GAC). I infer that you are confirming it, right?
Yes, I think that’s perfectly obvious Jorge.
(Reasons for doing so are something different and have been discussed and no full agreement found to date if I dare say so.)
thanks again and regards
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
Am 22.02.2016 um 14:54 schrieb Burr, Becky <Becky.Burr at neustar.biz<mailto:Becky.Burr at neustar.biz><mailto:Becky.Burr at neustar.biz>>:
J. Beckwith Burr
Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006
Office: +1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community