<html>
<body>
Greg, <br><br>
That is a simple question, but not a particularly relevant one in my
mind. I and ALAC have accepted a LOT of things that we do not believe
"is a good idea, or enhances ICANN's accountability, or corrects a
problem/deficiency in the Bylaws, or is needed for the transition".
So have other parts of the community. <br><br>
I would ask the opposite. What is the HARM? The overall number of times
that GAC advice is rejected is small. I find it hard to imagine that
there will be any substantive difference in outcomes in the future with
the two alternatives. If people want to die in the ditch (so to speak)
over the difference, I guess that is what will happen. <br><br>
Alan<br><br>
At 28/01/2016 06:24 PM, Greg Shatan wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">I'd like to ask a simple
question.<br><br>
Aside from members of the GAC, is there any affirmative support for the
2/3 threshold? In other words, does any member or participant think
that this is a good idea, or enhances ICANN's accountability, or corrects
a problem/deficiency in the Bylaws, or is needed for the transition? How
about any chartering organization or constituent part of a chartering
organization?<br><br>
I'm not asking about the value of compromise, or the effect (or lack
thereof) of the change, or whether it's something you can live
with. I'm asking about affirmative support.<br><br>
Greg<br><br>
[cross-posts to GAC list removed]<br><br>
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Kavouss Arasteh
<<a href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com">
kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<dl>
<dd>GAC did not formally reject the Rec 11 in announcing that " no
consensus is reached " GNSO and its spokemen push for their
objection, GAC must formally reject the Recommendation as currently GAC
lost o-1 because of Stress Test 18 ,if such ST remains and 2/ 3
supermajority becomes Simple Majority then GAC would loose o-2 .That is
not fair .There should not win loose against GAC, <br>
<dd>WIN-WIN YES, loose-loose yes ,for every body BUT NOT LOOSE FOR gac
and win for the others .<br>
<dd>THAT IS NOT FAIR <br>
<dd><font color="#888888">Kavouss <br>
</font><br>
<dd>2016-01-28 23:45 GMT+01:00 Andrew Sullivan
<<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a>
>:<br>
<dl>
<dd>On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:26:54PM +0000, Jeff Neuman wrote:<br>
<dd>> Where in writing has the GAC stated that it will reject the
accountability proposal of the 2/3 threshold is not in there.<br><br>
<dd>I didn't intend to suggest that they'd stated that in writing,
but<br>
<dd>rather to suggest that the GAC had consensus around the 2/3
number.<br>
<dd>But this'll teach me to go from memory, because I was relying on
my<br>
<dd>recollection of the Dublin communiqé. In fact it does not
exactly say<br>
<dd>that the GAC has consensus about the 2/3 threshold, so I'm
wrong.<br><br>
<dd>I still believe that the compromise position is an effective way<br>
<dd>forward that actually gives no additional real power to the GAC<br>
<dd>(because of the new Empowered Community) while yet granting the
2/3<br>
<dd>number that many seem to think is important. But the claim in
favour<br>
<dd>of 2/3 is indeed weaker given the GAC's stated positions.<br><br>
<dd>Best regards,<br><br>
<dd>A<br><br>
<dd>--<br>
<dd>Andrew Sullivan<br>
<dd><a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a><br>
<dd>_______________________________________________<br>
<dd>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<dd><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<dd>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
<br><br>
</dl><br><br>
<dd>_______________________________________________<br>
<dd>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<dd><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<dd>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
<br><br>
</dl><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
</blockquote></body>
</html>