<html>
<body>
Robin, I was not at this meeting, but if I had been, I would have
reminded the group that the 7 board members on which you base this
distribution is NOT the entire board. There are an additional 8 board
members selected by the NomCom plus the CEO, and any new community
mechanism cannot ignore that the SOs+ALAC are only part of the
board.<br><br>
There may be multiple ways of addressing this, but it is clear to me that
one cannot base any new power structure on what is less than half of the
current board. That would put 6/7ths of the power in the SOs which only
have 6/16 of the current board.<br><br>
I also note that you seem to have reverted to the pure voting percentages
in the August proposal instead of the consensus model proposed in
Dublin.<br><br>
Alan<br><br>
<br><br>
At 01/11/2015 06:10 PM, Robin Gross wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Resending as some had a problem
reading the file. - Robin <br><br>
On Oct 30, 2015, at 3:56 PM, Robin Gross wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Thanks, Steve.
<br><br>
All, attached is an exploration of the option to provide 4 units to ASO,
CCNSO, and GNSO + 2 units to ALAC, as mirrored on the existing board
structure. The threshold percentages were taken from the 2nd draft
proposal, and then just transposed into a pool of 14 weighted fractional
units. Suggestions for improvements and comments on this
proposal are much appreciated. (My additions are the comments in
pink color in the attached document). <br><br>
Thanks,<br>
Robin<br>
<alternative weights in Community Mechanism.docx> <br><br>
<br><br>
On Oct 30, 2015, at 2:24 PM, Steve DelBianco wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Attached is my �homework�
assignment today � reflecting split voting option for each AC/SO to
decide whether to exercise a community power. I updated
just the Appendix that Jordan circulated for today�s call, adding
explanations and a new column on the decision table (also shown
below). <br><br>
<Screen Shot 2015-10-30 at 5.16.33 PM.png><br><br>
From:
<<a href="mailto:wp1-bounces@icann.org">wp1-bounces@icann.org</a>>
on behalf of Jordan Carter<br>
Date: Friday, October 30, 2015 at 12:06 AM<br>
To: "<a href="mailto:wp1@icann.org">wp1@icann.org</a>"<br>
Subject: [WP1] Pls Read - Agenda for Meeting - WP1 on Fri 30 October at
18h UTC<br><br>
Hi all <br><br>
Our call is on Friday from 18h UTC, and may last up to two
hours.<br><br>
The proposed agenda items are as follows. <u>PLEASE READ THIS AGENDA
CAREFULLY</u> as it sets out how I propose we run the meeting and the
questions I propose we aim to answer.<br><br>
<b>1. Review of Agenda<br>
</b><br>
<b>2. Decision-making in the Community Mechanism<br>
</b><i>This agenda item should look at decision-making, and seeing where
the WP sits with key issues raised in the "Dublin
Approach".<br><br>
To prepare for this item I suggest reading the following papers:<br>
- Community Decision-Making: The Dublin Approach Working Paper<br>
- Public Comment Analysis - Voting in the community mechanism<br><br>
If you have time, also have a look at the staff analysis of public
comments - the "Model" and "Voting-Forum" tabs in
particular.<br><br>
Papers attached or linked below. I have not updated the Dublin Approach
paper, but kept the very valuable comments, and moved Robin's added
issues into separate rows in the Issues Table.<br><br>
<b>My suggestion is that we deal with the following specific
questions</b>, as they are the key changes in the model compared with
what we presented in the Second Draft Proposal. We should for each
question identify whether we have a consensus on them or whether we don't
-- so we can advise the full CCWG of WP1's views.<br><br>
a) Do we support the decision-making model (by consensus) replacing the
voting approach?<br><br>
b) Do we support only one view being expressed by each SO or AC?<br><br>
c) Do we support an equal say for each participating SO or AC?<br><br>
<br>
We also need to address the following:<br><br>
d) In our Third Draft Proposal, which SOs and ACs do we propose should be
participating? that is, do we respect the SSAC's desire not to, and do we
take a view re RSSAC?<br><br>
e) Based on our answer to d), do we need to make any changes to the
numbers in the decision-making framework?<br><br>
<br>
</i><br>
<b>3. Other Work Required by WP1<br>
</b><i>I do not have a current list of work we need to do in the next
fortnight but believe this will be clearer following next week's CCWG. I
welcome staff or co-chairs' input on this at this point of the WP1
agenda, and of course suggestions from WP1 participants.<br>
</i><br>
<b>4. Any Other Business<br>
</b><br><br>
<br>
<b><u>Papers<br><br>
</u></b>I attach PDFs of the Dublin Approach paper and of the Public
Comment report section on voting.<br><br>
The Dublin paper Google Doc is at:
<<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zHZl_NvQ1WChatX8NT2Q1rQi4zQZgbrbAxrQSsH3tZQ/edit">
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zHZl_NvQ1WChatX8NT2Q1rQi4zQZgbrbAxrQSsH3tZQ/edit</a>
><br><br>
The full WP1 Public Comment is at:
<<a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/56142506/2015-10-12-CCWG-WP1-SecondPC-FullAnalysis.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1444644438000&api=v2">
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/56142506/2015-10-12-CCWG-WP1-SecondPC-FullAnalysis.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1444644438000&api=v2</a>
><br><br>
You may also find the staff analysis of Public Comments useful, which
deals with voting specifically in a couple of the tabs (Model and
Voting-Forum):
<<a href="https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/54693137/PC2%20tool%20-%2024%20SeptBTv2.xlsx?version=1&modificationDate=1443208173000&api=v2">
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/54693137/PC2%20tool%20-%2024%20SeptBTv2.xlsx?version=1&modificationDate=1443208173000&api=v2</a>
><br><br>
cheers<br>
Jordan<br><br>
-- <br>
Jordan Carter<br><br>
Chief Executive <br>
<b>InternetNZ</b><br><br>
+64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)<br>
Email:
<a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a>
<br>
Skype: jordancarter<br>
Web: <a href="http://www.internetnz.nz/">www.internetnz.nz</a> <br><br>
<i>A better world through a better Internet <br>
</i><br>
<Screen Shot 2015-10-30 at 5.16.33 PM.png><Dublin breakout on
Community Decision - split votes v1.pdf><Dublin breakout on
Community Decision - split votes
v1.docx>_______________________________________________<br>
WP1 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:WP1@icann.org">WP1@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1</a></blockquote><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
WP1 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:WP1@icann.org">WP1@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1</a></blockquote><br><br>
<br>
</blockquote></body>
</html>