<div dir="ltr">I agree with Avri. Further, Board B seems to become some kind of mutant hybrid of Board and management, which should be different roles.<div><br></div><div>While we can always explore it fully (within some sense of time constraints), I would not see much mileage in doing so.</div><div><br></div><div>Greg</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Avri Doria <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org" target="_blank">avri@acm.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#330033">
Hi,<br>
<br>
I have never understood the appeal of such a model. To me it seems
like twice as much Board to worry about in an environment of never
really knowing where the ultimate responsibility lay.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
avri</font></span><span class=""><br>
<br>
<div>On 19-Feb-15 13:00, Mr R.T. Daniel
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">Thinking out loud.<br>
So is there any mileage in having an icann A & icann B.<br>
"A" board = public interest & contract co.<br>
"B" board private non profit implementing Board A 's ..policy
frameworks....etc...etc..<br>
Board B answerable to board A?<br>
RD<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>