[CCWG-ACCT] Poll results
Roelof Meijer
Roelof.Meijer at sidn.nl
Tue Feb 23 14:08:29 UTC 2016
Thanks for that Avri, I cannot agree more
Best,
Roelof
On 23-02-16 13:30, "accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org on
behalf of Avri Doria" <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org on
behalf of avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
>Hi,
>
>I do not object to them having been included.
>
>We are trying to short circuit the negotiation cycle. To do that we are
>being inclusive and should be grateful for the participation of all who
>could derail the process. I see this as a good thing.
>
>I find this new formalism to be a bit bizarre. Once we had members they
>were too elite. So we added participants. Now only formally listed
>participants count? This is about the community and the best consensus
>we find, not about status quo notions of membership.
>
>avri
>
>On 23-Feb-16 13:41, Edward Morris wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I object to the inclusion in the tally of votes those individuals who
>> are neither Appointed Members nor Participants of the CCWG on
>> Enhancing Accountability. The full roster of Participants are listed
>> here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=50823968
>>.
>>
>> The participation of staff, other than liaisons, is particularly
>> troublesome. The number of Board members participating in a voting
>> capacity in this poll despite not being a member, liaison or
>> participant of the group is also a problem. Certainly the Board does
>> not wish to leave itself open to charges of packing the meeting so it
>> would achieve it's desired outcome despite the desires of regularly
>> and properly participating members of the community.
>>
>> The barrier to becoming a CCWG participant is admirably low. The
>> process should be respected. I would request all tallies be redone to
>> reflect only the votes who have properly joined the CCWG as a Member,
>> Participant or Liaison.
>>
>> Respectfully,
>>
>> Edward Morris
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From*: "Grace Abuhamad" <grace.abuhamad at icann.org>
>> *Sent*: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 10:29 AM
>> *To*: "Accountability Cross Community"
>> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>> *Subject*: [CCWG-ACCT] Poll results
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>>
>>
>> To ensure full transparency around the polling, the staff have
>> reviewed the recording for the call and crosschecked the results. The
>> Adobe Connect recording is available here for your viewing as well:
>> https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p2ner13u4kd/.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please note that the instructions regarding participation in the polls
>> were as follows:
>>
>> · Anyone on the call was invited to participate in the poll
>> (members & participants).
>>
>> · To participate, participants in the Adobe Connect room used
>> either a red or green tick to respond to the poll question.
>>
>> · Those on audio-only could express their position over the phone.
>>
>> · After the polls, analysis would be conducted to assess
>> participation from CCWG members (for the purposes of these results,
>> the members¹ names are in bold font).
>>
>>
>>
>> The Chairs conducted four polls in a group that varied between 85-90
>> participants. The text used as the basis for the polls is Paragraph 72
>> of the CCWG report (see attached slide for the text as well as the
>> 2^nd bullet highlighted in red). The first two poll questions were
>> based on objections and the second two poll questions were based on
>> expressions of support.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Summary of results: *
>>
>>
>>
>> · 11 objections to removing the 2^nd bullet in Paragraph 72 (in
>> red on the slide)
>>
>> o (2 CCWG member objections)
>>
>>
>>
>> · 27 objections to sending the report forward as it is currently,
>> with the full text in Paragraph 72
>>
>> o (8 CCWG member objections, including all ALAC members)
>>
>>
>>
>> · 36 support removing the language in the 2^nd bullet in
>> Paragraph 72 (in red on the slide)
>>
>> o (10 CCWG members supporting)
>>
>>
>>
>> · 14 support sending the report forward as it is currently, with
>> the full text in Paragraph 72
>>
>> o (2 CCWG members supporting)
>>
>>
>>
>> *Detailed results: *
>>
>>
>>
>> *Poll #1* Who objects to removing the 2^nd bullet in Paragraph 72 (in
>> red on the slide), (³If the IRP is not available to challenge the
>> Board action in question²)?
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. Brett Schaefer (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 2. Edward Morris (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 3. Farzaneh Badii (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 4. James Gannon (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 5. Malcolm Hutty (ISPCP Participant)
>>
>> 6. Milton Mueller (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 7. Paul Rosenzweig (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 8. *Robin Gross*(NCSG Member)
>>
>> 9. Stephen Deerhake (ccNSO Participant)
>>
>> 10.Tatiana Tropina (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 11.*Eberhard Lisse*(ccNSO Member)
>>
>>
>>
>> *Poll #2* Who objects to sending the report forward (to Chartering
>> Organizations) as it is currently, (i.e. the 19 February version with
>> the full text in Paragraph 72)?
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. *Alan Greenberg*(ALAC Member)
>>
>> 2. Asha Hemrajani (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 3. Cherine Chalaby (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 4. *Cheryl Langdon-Orr*(ALAC Member)
>>
>> 5. Chris Disspain (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 6. David McAuley (GNSO Participant)
>>
>> 7. Fadi Chehade (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 8. George Sadowsky (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 9. Jorge Cancio (GAC Participant)
>>
>> 10.*Julia Wolman*(GAC Member)
>>
>> 11.Keith Drazek (RySG Participant)
>>
>> 12.*Leon Sanchez*(ALAC Member)
>>
>> 13.Lito Ibarra (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 14.Louisewies Van del Laan (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 15.Markus Kummer (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 16.*Olga Cavalli*(GAC Member)
>>
>> 17.Olivier Crepin-Leblond (ALAC Participant)
>>
>> 18.Pedro da Silva (GAC Participant)
>>
>> 19.Rafael Perez Galindo (GAC Participant)
>>
>> 20.Rinalia Abdul Rahim (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 21.*Roelof Meijer*(ccNSO Member)
>>
>> 22.Ron da Silva (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 23.Samantha Eisner (ICANN Staff Liaison)
>>
>> 24.Seun Ojedeji (ALAC Participant)
>>
>> 25.Steve Crocker (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 26.*Sebastien Bachollet*(ALAC Member)
>>
>> 27.Stephen Deerhake (ccNSO Participant)
>>
>> 28.Tarek Kamel (ICANN Staff Participant)
>>
>> 29.*Tijani Ben Jemaa*(ALAC Member)
>>
>>
>>
>> *Poll #3* Who supports removing the language in the 2^nd bullet in
>> Paragraph 72 (in red on the slide), (³If the IRP is not available to
>> challenge the Board action in question²)?
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. *Alan**Greenberg* (ALAC Member)
>>
>> 2. Annaliese Williams (GAC Participant)
>>
>> 3. Asha Hemrajani (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 4. Avri Doria (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 5. Cherine Chalaby (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 6. *Cheryl Langdon-Orr*(ALAC Member)
>>
>> 7. Chris Disspain (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 8. David McAuley (GNSO Participant)
>>
>> 9. Fadi Chehade (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 10.Finn Petersen (GAC Participant)
>>
>> 11.George Sadowsky (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 12.Greg Shatan (IPC Participant)
>>
>> 13.*James Bladel*(RrSG Member)
>>
>> 14.*Julia**Wolman* (GAC Member)
>>
>> 15.Kavouss Arasteh (GAC Participant)
>>
>> 16.Keith Drazek (RySG Participant)
>>
>> 17.*Leon**Sanchez* (ALAC Member)
>>
>> 18.Lito Ibarra (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 19.Louisewies Van del Laan (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 20.Mark Carvell (GAC Participant)
>>
>> 21.Markus Kummer (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 22.Mary Uduma (ccNSO Participant)
>>
>> 23.Niels Ten Oever (Participant)
>>
>> 30.*Olga**Cavalli* (GAC Member)
>>
>> 24.Olivier Crepin-Leblond (ALAC Participant)
>>
>> 25.Paul Szyndler (ccNSO Participant)
>>
>> 26.Pedro da Silva (GAC Participant)
>>
>> 31.Rafael Perez Galindo (GAC Participant)
>>
>> 27.Rinalia Abdul Rahim (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 28.*Roelof**Meijer* (ccNSO Member)
>>
>> 29.Ron da Silva (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 30.Sabine Meyer (GAC Participant)
>>
>> 31.Seun Ojedeji (ALAC Participant)
>>
>> 32.Steve Crocker (ICANN Board Participant)
>>
>> 33.*Steve DelBianco*(CSG Member)
>>
>> 34.*Sebastien**Bachollet* (ALAC Member)
>>
>> 35.Tarek Kamel (ICANN Staff)
>>
>> 36.*Tijani**Ben Jemaa* (ALAC Member)
>>
>>
>>
>> *Poll #4* Who supports sending the report to Chartering Organizations
>> as it is currently, (i.e. the 19 February version with the full text
>> in Paragraph 72)?
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. Aarti Bhavana (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 2. Brett Schaefer (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 3. Edward Morris (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 4. Farzaneh Badii (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 5. James Gannon (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 6. *Jordan Carter*(ccNSO Member)
>>
>> 7. Martin Boyle (ccNSO Participant)
>>
>> 8. Matthew Shears (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 9. Malcolm Hutty (ISPCP Participant)
>>
>> 10.Milton Mueller (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 11.Paul Rosenzweig (NCSG Participant)
>>
>> 12.*Robin**Gross* (NCSG Member)
>>
>> 13.Stephen Deerhake (ccNSO Participant)
>>
>> 14.Tatiana Tropina (NCSG Participant)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>---
>This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>_______________________________________________
>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list