<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">At the very least, the effect of "GAC Advice" over the formal objection of several sovereign states is unknown. "3%" could be 4 or 5 nations, depending on the size of the GAC. It will certainly change the dynamic. To some extent, I believe this makes it highly unlikely the GAC will move in that direction...</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Mueller, Milton L <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu" target="_blank">milton@gatech.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=""><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> This makes sense, but isn't it up to the GAC to realize this?<br>
><br>
> avri<br>
><br>
<br>
</span>If it's the right thing to do, then it's the right thing to do. Are you saying that if the GAC doesn't realize this it isn't valid?<br>
<br>
As others have noted, we are not talking about how the GAC runs its own procedures, we are talking about the status of GAC advice in the overall ICANN process, and about how that advice is treated by the board. It is the community as a whole, not the GAC unilaterally, that gives GAC advice its special status, via the ICANN bylaws. Therefore it is not just up to the GAC to realize this, but up to the rest of us as well.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><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" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>