[CCWG-ACCT] Poll results

[Jordan Carter]

I have no problem with this and believe we already have text in our report
that requires it. That is, if during the implementation process, a
decisional participant intended by the group is no longer to be one, the
thresholds have to be revisited (and that means lowered).

I should state for the record my very clear understanding that according to
our report, GAC *will* be included as a decisional participant in the
bylaws.  It would only be in the case that GAC objected to being included
that it would be removed, and that we would then revisit the thresholds.

cheers
Jordan

On 24 February 2016 at 02:57, Schaefer, Brett <Brett.Schaefer at heritage.org>
wrote:

> Chairs,
>
>
>
> As I mentioned in the call last night, before any final announcement is
> made, I would hope that we could get explicit clarification and commitment
> from the Board that, if the GAC cannot decide or chooses not to become a
> decisional participant, that the Board would support lowering the
> thresholds for exercising all EC powers to avoid the requirement for SOAC
> unanimous support to exercise those powers.
>
>
>
> I am concerned that the Board’s position on the GAC carve-out reference
> Board recall, could/would be equally applied to the above situation. I
> believe now, before a final decision is made, is the time to clarify that
> matter.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Brett
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> 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 *Dr
> Eberhard W Lisse
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 23, 2016 8:41 AM
> *To:* nigel at channelisles.net; accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Poll results
>
>
>
> Without even bothering to register as Participant.
>
>
> el
>
> On 2016-02-23 15:36, Nigel Roberts wrote:
> > I'm also puzzled as to how Board Members, and the CEO, can simply pitch
> > up and pitch in, late in the game.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 23/02/16 13:27, Edward Morris wrote:
> >> Disagree.
> >> There are formal requirements for participating in the CCWG.
> >
> > There are indeed
> >
> >
> >> It's a minimal requirement, but a necessary one
> > The fact that the requirement is minimal is no excuse for dispensing
> > with it extrajudicially. In fact, it's no excuse at all, since if it is
> > minimal, anyone who wanted to be Participant has a very low hurdle.
> >
> > No gerrymandering, please.
> [...]
>
>
> --
> Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar)
> el at lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
> PO Box 8421 \ /
> Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>


-- 
Jordan Carter

Chief Executive
*InternetNZ - your voice for the Open Internet*

+64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)
Email: jordan at internetnz.net.nz
Skype: jordancarter
Web: www.internetnz.nz
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160224/3df5fac5/attachment.html>