<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Sorry, I accidentally left out GAC as an "Advisory" role in the text below. So the votes in the board composition model would be:<div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div> 4 votes for GNSO, CCNSO, ASO</div><div> 2 votes for ALAC</div><div> Advisory roles for <font class="Apple-style-span" color="#e81f13"><b>GAC</b></font>, SSAC and RSSAC</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Apologies for any confusion.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Robin</div><div><br><div><div>On Jul 31, 2015, at 10:15 AM, Robin Gross wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Thanks, Jordan, I appreciate your willingness to include diverse viewpoints in the report. However, the proposal for the voting weights is somewhat mis-stated in this draft. The proposal to model the board composition for voting weights is for a *ratio* of votes, not for an exact number of votes. <div><br></div><div>If we are to list these proposals as exact number of votes proposed, then, for consistency sake, please note that my proposal for the weighted votes would be: <div> 4 votes for GNSO, CCNSO, ASO</div><div> 2 votes for ALAC</div><div> Advisory roles for SSAC and RSSAC<br><div><br></div><div>While it is the board composition *ratio* I am proposing to use as our model (2 votes for GNSO, CCNSO, ASO; 1 vote for ALAC; Advisory Roles for SSAC, RSSAC), the actual number of votes would be larger to reflect the diversity of views within the various constituent parts.</div><div><br></div><div>I hope the draft can be updated to correctly reflect that my proposal was for a *ratio* of votes (not actual number of votes) in the community mechanism.</div><div><br></div><div>Thank you,</div><div>Robin</div><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>On Jul 30, 2015, at 11:05 AM, Jordan Carter wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">Hi all<div><br></div><div>Attached please find mark ups showing update on the voting weights part of 5A based on the discussion at this forty-seventh CCWG meeting.<br clear="all"><div><br></div><div>Comments etc welcome, preferably on the main CCWG list.</div><div><br></div><div>Jordan</div><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr" style="font-size:small">Jordan Carter<br><br>Chief Executive <br><b>InternetNZ</b><br><br>+64-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)<br>Email: <a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a> <br>Skype: jordancarter<br></div><div dir="ltr" style="font-size:small"><br><i>A better world through a better Internet </i></div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>
<span><5A2-CommMech-VOTING-INFLUENCE-after-CCWG-47.docx></span><span><5A2-CommMech-VOTING-INFLUENCE-after-CCWG-47.pdf></span>_______________________________________________<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">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>WP1 mailing list<br><a href="mailto:WP1@icann.org">WP1@icann.org</a><br>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></body></html>