[CCWG-ACCT] Caption Notes-Recordings-Transcript links for Jurisdiction Meeting #35 - 14 June 2017

Greg Shatan gregshatanipc at gmail.com
Thu Jun 15 22:25:59 UTC 2017


There was ample opportunity for participants to speak in favor of your
proposal over the course of the meeting.  I wanted to give those who were
opposed to Thomas's proposal ample opportunity (perhaps even too ample an
opportunity) to state their case and persuade the others on the call.  (I
suppose, to be fair, it could be stated that those opposed to Thomas's
proposal supported yours.)  The record reflects this opportunity.  I think
that the bulk of the people on the call -- those who supported Thomas's
proposal -- did not feel the need to speak at length.  It would be
incorrect to judge the process of the call based on how many inches of
transcript or minutes of the call were taken up by each side.

I encourage you to shift your focus to bringing out the issues that you
believe should be considered by the group, and to be as concrete and
explanatory as possible.  For instance, you mention something you call
"unwarranted interference," but I have no idea what that means.  Assuming
this refers to an issue you would propose for consideration by the group,
we would be much better served by focusing on that.

Continuing along the same path that we have the last two weeks would just
seem to waste more time away from the issues.


On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 5:58 PM, <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch> wrote:

> Dear Greg
> Thank you for your views.
> I'm also interested in the views of others as Avri and Segun, that seem to
> have good points to make and are correcting some things which were put to
> the group.
> As to my proposal: from the transcript it appears that you reported about
> it, but no debate took place. Hence your assertion that it did not "garner
> substantial support".
>  Instead Thomas R. intervened with a prepared co-chair proposal. The
> subsequent interventions show in my view a quite divided set of speakers
> until at the end of the call you ask for objections only about Thomas'
> proposal - which relied, as Avri has explained, partially at least on an
> incorrect reading of her prior suggestions to the list.
> If I were the lead of this Subgroup I would be more conservative in
> qualifiying the situation, in view of the transcript, the reactions and how
> awkwardly all happened and the corrections that are being made.
> In any case it is up to the CCWG to consider this Subgroup proposal (if it
> can be called such). And the CCWG cannot change what was agreed by the
> chartering orgs.
> regards
> Jorge
> ________________________________
> Von: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> Datum: 15. Juni 2017 um 23:39:44 MESZ
> An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>
> Cc: ws2-jurisdiction <ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>, MSSI Secretariat <
> mssi-secretariat at icann.org>, accountability-cross-community at icann.org <
> accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
> Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Caption Notes-Recordings-Transcript links for
> Jurisdiction Meeting #35 - 14 June 2017
> Jorge,
> Thank you for your views.  Your proposal was put before the group at the
> beginning of the call (as you requested); it did not garner substantial
> support.  The Co-Chairs have been monitoring this Subgroup and I think
> their statement, as offered by Thomas, speaks for itself.  A request for
> those opposed to the Co-Chairs' conclusion was made on the call, and we
> recorded four opposed.
> I also hope that we can return to substantive discussions now and avoid
> rehashing this decision or the underlying concepts yet again.
> Greg
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 3:32 PM, <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch<mailto:
> Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>> wrote:
> Dear Greg and all,
> Sorry to see that another call was lost in preempting hypothetical
> remedies, before even a full discussion about the issues has taken place
> (some of the inputs to the questionnaire have not even been presented yet -
> and the cases are far from having been finalised).
> Especially the issue of taylor-made protections against unwarranted
> interference would merit a real debate.
> But after several attempts to foreclose some quite improbable scenarios it
> seems that this preemptive action has succeeded, albeit in awkward
> circumstances.
> I personally feel that the approach I propose(d) -which is what we had
> agreed before after initial debates- would have been much more efficient in
> our time-management, would have followed the logical order of analyzing
> first issues and -being factual and objective- would have avoided this
> absolutely unnecessary divisiveness.
> Hope that we may at last return to substantive discussions soon and that
> the Plenary is wise enough not to close the door to considering sensible,
> commonly agreed solutions, if our future analysis of the issues reveals
> them appropriate.
> kind regards
> Jorge
> ________________________________
> Von: MSSI Secretariat <mssi-secretariat at icann.org<mailto:
> mssi-secretariat at icann.org>>
> Datum: 15. Juni 2017 um 19:47:01 MESZ
> An: CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:
> accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> Cc: ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org<mailto:ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org> <
> ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org<mailto:ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>>
> Betreff: [CCWG-ACCT] Caption Notes-Recordings-Transcript links for
> Jurisdiction Meeting #35 - 14 June 2017
> Hello all,
> The caption notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2
> Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #35– 14 June 2017 will be available here:
> https://community.icann.org/x/GSDwAw
> A copy of the action items and raw caption notes may be found below.
> With kind regards,
> Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant
> Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI)
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
> [cid:image001.png at 01D2E5D5.73E41D50]
> Skype:  brenda.brewer.icann
> Phone:  1-310-745-1107<tel:1-310-745-1107>
> Raw Captioning Notes
> Please note that these are the unofficial transcript. Official transcript
> will be posted 2-3 days after the call
>   *   Word Doc<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/
> 66068505/Jurisdicton_0614ICANN1300UTC.RTF?version=1&modificationDate=
> 1497462625000&api=v2>
>   *   PDF<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/
> 66068505/Jurisdiction_0614ICANN1300UTC.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=
> 1497462637000&api=v2>
> Decisions:
>   *   Thomas Rickert for the CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs, We have
> concluded that the Jurisdiction sub-group will take Californian
> jurisdiction as a base line for all its recommendations, and that the
> sub-team not pursue recommendations to change ICANN's jurisdiction of
> incorporation, location of headquarters or seek immunity for ICANN.  With
> this decision we are recognizing that there is no possibility that there
> would be consensus for an immunity based concept or a change of place of
> incorporation.  As such I would establish in the minutes of this call that
> we focus on the solution that gets most traction.  Recognizing that this
> does not eliminate, as I think Avri said during last week's call, that we
> can discuss all issues that might arise during the deliberations.  But that
> we actually focus on the status quo being Californian law and place of
> incorporation. and work on solutions that are founded on this.
> Action Items:
>   *   (none)
> Requests:
>   *   (none)
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org<mailto:Acc
> ountability-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/20170615/969599f0/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list