<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">If there were to be a process for non-participating AC's to provide advice, it seems that there should be a process for non-participating SO's to provide advice as well. It may seem unlikely for the SOs not to participate, but one never knows....</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg </div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Mark Carvell <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mark.carvell@culture.gov.uk" target="_blank">mark.carvell@culture.gov.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px">Dear CCWG colleagues</span><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px"><br></span></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px">As you know, the UK Government supports Recommendation 11. I believe there is support outside the GAC for the 2/3 threshold for rejection of GAC advice. </span><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px"> </span><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px">I agree that there is potential in Becky's proposal for a compromise solution for obviating the double opportunity risk. </span></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px"><br></span></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px">While the GAC would not participating in some potentially critical decisions under this arrangement, the community should recognise the value of the GAC providing advice in the form of guidance that <i>inter alia</i> recounts the rationale for its original advice to the Board. </span></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px"><br></span></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px">I also suggest more generally that some</span><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px"> formality is accorded to the process whereby any non-participating AC can provide advice, in order to ensure that such advice when received </span><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px">is duly recorded, taken fully into account and resp</span><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px">onded to, before the participating SO/ACs proceed to a decision.</span></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px">Kind regards </span></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px"><br></span></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6666669845581px">Mark </span></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr">Mark Carvell<div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">United Kingdom Representative on the Governmental Advisory Committee of ICANN</div><br></div><div>Global Internet Governance Policy</div><div>Department for Culture, Media and Sport</div><div><a href="mailto:mark.carvell@culture.gov.uk" target="_blank">mark.carvell@culture.gov.uk</a></div><div>tel <a href="tel:%2B44%20%280%29%2020%207211%206062" value="+442072116062" target="_blank">+44 (0) 20 7211 6062</a></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div class="h5">On 1 February 2016 at 13:22, Finn Petersen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:FinPet@erst.dk" target="_blank">FinPet@erst.dk</a>></span> wrote:<br></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="DA" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Dear Becky, Co-chairs, all,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">As we have stated in the Danish comments to the CCWG 3rd Draft Proposal, we fully support Recommendation 11. We believe it is a carefully drafted
compromise, which we hoped (and still do) would achieve the support such a compromise deserves in order to move the CCWG proposal forward. We would also like to remind colleagues that the 2/3 threshold for the ICANN Board rejecting GAC consensus advice was
agreed by the GAC in the GAC Communiqué Dublin. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">However</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">, we feel Becky’s proposal is
a very constructive way forward and is worth discussing further. It would also eliminate the need to do a poll at the CCWG-meeting tomorrow morning. It would be unfortunate go down that road at this moment in time as it seems that Becky’s proposal addresses
some of the concerns expressed. Also it is not clear to us whether the result (based on the recent discussion on the list) would take us any further in our work.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">ICANN’s communities need not be further divided – it is time for convergence and compromise!<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Best,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Finn<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Kind regards<br>
<br>
<b>Finn Petersen<u></u><u></u></b></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Director of International ICT Rellations</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><br>
<br>
</span><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:maroon">DANISH BUSINESS AUTHORITY</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:maroon"><br>
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:black"><br>
Dahlerups Pakhus<br>
Langelinie Allé 17<br>
DK-2100 København Ø<br>
Telephone: <a href="tel:%2B45%203529%201000" value="+4535291000" target="_blank">+45 3529 1000</a><br>
Direct: <a href="tel:%2B45%203529%201013" value="+4535291013" target="_blank">+45 3529 1013</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:black">Mobile: <a href="tel:%2B45%202072%207131" value="+4520727131" target="_blank">+45 2072 7131</a><br>
E-mail: <a href="mailto:FinPet@erst.dk" target="_blank">FinPet@erst.dk</a><br>
<a href="http://www.erhvervsstyrelsen.dk" target="_blank">www.erhvervsstyrelsen.dk</a><br>
<br>
MINISTRY FOR BUSINESS AND GROWTH<br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:Webdings;color:green">P</span><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)">
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:green">Please consider the environment before printing this email.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125)">
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border-style:solid none none;border-top-color:rgb(181,196,223);border-top-width:1pt;padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif">Fra:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif"> <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>På vegne af </b>Burr, Becky<br>
<b>Sendt:</b> 29. januar 2016 21:05<br>
<b>Til:</b> Greg Shatan; Mueller, Milton L<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Emne:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Recommendation 11, 2/3 board threshold, GAC consensus, and finishing<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div></div><div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black">I have a proposal for discussion.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div><span class="">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black">Start from the premise that ICANN may implement GAC Advice only consistent with the Bylaws, including the Mission. What if we accept the 2/3rd rejection language
but also provide that the GAC cannot act in a decision-making role with respect to an exercise of community power designed to challenge the Board’s implementation of GAC Advice. In other words, the GAC would not be counted in the “no more than two SO/ACs
objecting” threshold to a community IRP challenge to the Board’s implementation of GAC Advice alleged to exceed the scope of ICANN’s Mission.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black">I think this addresses the two bites at the apple problem we might otherwise have, and provides a safety valve to counter balance the 2/3rds rejection threshold.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black">Just a thought - <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:12pt"><b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:black">J. Beckwith Burr</span></b><b><span style="font-size:10pt;color:rgb(38,38,38)">
</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(51,102,255)"><br>
</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(0,134,86)">Neustar, Inc.</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(6,134,88)">
</span></b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(125,125,125)">/</span><b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(6,134,88)">
</span></b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(125,125,125)">Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006</span><span style="font-size:9pt;color:gray"><br>
</span><b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(0,134,86)">Office:</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(125,125,125)">
</span></b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(125,125,125)"><a href="tel:%2B1.202.533.2932" value="+12025332932" target="_blank">+1.202.533.2932</a> </span><b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(0,134,86)">Mobile:</span></b><b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(125,125,125)">
</span></b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(125,125,125)"><a href="tel:%2B1.202.352.6367" value="+12023526367" target="_blank">+1.202.352.6367</a> </span><strong><span style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(125,125,125)">/</span></strong><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(6,134,88)">
</span><span style="color:black"><a href="http://www.neustar.biz" target="_blank"><b><span style="font-size:9pt;color:rgb(0,134,86)">neustar.biz</span></b></a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</span></div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border-style:solid none none;border-top-color:rgb(181,196,223);border-top-width:1pt;padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black">Greg Shatan <<a href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com" target="_blank">gregshatanipc@gmail.com</a>></span></p><div><div class="h5"><br>
<b>Date: </b>Friday, January 29, 2016 at 2:38 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>"Mueller, Milton L" <<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu" target="_blank">milton@gatech.edu</a>><br>
<b>Cc: </b>Accountability Community <<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Recommendation 11, 2/3 board threshold, GAC consensus, and finishing<u></u><u></u></div></div><p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div><div><div class="h5">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black">Milton,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black">I agree with your assessment of the situation, and I think you are likely correct about the answer to my question. I wanted to see if I had overlooked positive
support for the 2/3 majority as such. It appears that (subject to further responses) I have not.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black">Greg<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div></div><div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black">On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Mueller, Milton L <<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu" target="_blank">milton@gatech.edu</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div></div><div>
<div><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Greg:</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">It was clear from the earlier (pre-transition) process that there was virtually no positive
support outside GAC for the proposition that the board could only reject its advice with a 2/3 majority. There was, in fact, overwhelming opposition to the 2/3 threshold.
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Insofar as that idea gained acceptance (not support), it was perceived as a compromise
that would help the GAC to accept a requirement that it continue to act on the basis of UN consensus.
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">So I think the answer to your question,</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">
“is there any affirmative support for the 2/3 threshold?” </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,78,121)">outside the GAC is clearly no.
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,78,121)"> </span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div></div><div style="border-style:none none none solid;border-left-color:blue;border-left-width:1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4pt"><div><div class="h5">
<div>
<div style="border-style:solid none none;border-top-color:rgb(225,225,225);border-top-width:1pt;padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"><a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">
accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Greg Shatan<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, January 29, 2016 11:58 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Alan Greenberg <<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca" target="_blank">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org" target="_blank">
accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Recommendation 11, 2/3 board threshold, GAC consensus, and finishing</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black">Alan,</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black">I think you misunderstand the question. Of course ALAC has decided to join a position supported by the
bulk of the other participants, even where it did not really agree with that position. Every stakeholder and stakeholder structure has done that, here (and in every other WG, I assume), to avoid being an outlier and to honor the building of consensus. This
is the usual move at some point in the consensus-building process, when dealing with a position that has broad multistakeholder support.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black">But this virtually always starts with a position that already has significant multistakeholder support.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black">I am honestly unclear whether the 2/3 proposal, on its own, has broad multistakeholder support. I could
jump to conclusions, but I prefer not to. Hence the question, which I think is quite relevant. First, if I go back to my constituency and tell them that we are the outlier and this has broad multistakeholder support, that may be persuasive to some of them,
committed as we are to consensus-driven processes. Second, I think it is relevant to understand the context of this particular position, isolated from discussions of the value of compromise and other such things.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black">Greg</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div><div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 9:09 PM, Alan Greenberg <<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca" target="_blank">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div></div><blockquote style="border-style:none none none solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin:5pt 0cm 5pt 4.8pt">
<div><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">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:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div></div><blockquote style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt"><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">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" target="_blank"> kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">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,
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">WIN-WIN YES, loose-loose yes ,for every body BUT NOT LOOSE FOR gac and win for the others .<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">THAT IS NOT FAIR <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt;margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(136,136,136)">Kavouss </span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">2016-01-28 23:45 GMT+01:00 Andrew Sullivan <<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com" target="_blank">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a> >:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:26:54PM +0000, Jeff Neuman wrote:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt;margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">> Where in writing has the GAC stated that it will reject the accountability proposal of the 2/3 threshold is not in there.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">I didn't intend to suggest that they'd stated that in writing, but<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">rather to suggest that the GAC had consensus around the 2/3 number.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">But this'll teach me to go from memory, because I was relying on my<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">recollection of the Dublin communiqé. In fact it does not exactly say<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt;margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">that the GAC has consensus about the 2/3 threshold, so I'm wrong.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">I still believe that the compromise position is an effective way<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">forward that actually gives no additional real power to the GAC<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">(because of the new Empowered Community) while yet granting the 2/3<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">number that many seem to think is important. But the claim in favour<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt;margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">of 2/3 is indeed weaker given the GAC's stated positions.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt;margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">Best regards,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt;margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">A<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">--<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">Andrew Sullivan<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com" target="_blank">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">_______________________________________________<u></u><u></u></span></p><span class="">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt;margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=IPeeS727VSPyw6EopaZqiSVdGmc7CU9_kkXYW3JiLjE&s=xohs2ScA5mgcD6vDqSINegEcDgo0OnBIZYQvTaptkRI&e=" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">_______________________________________________<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black">Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt;margin-left:36pt">
<span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=IPeeS727VSPyw6EopaZqiSVdGmc7CU9_kkXYW3JiLjE&s=xohs2ScA5mgcD6vDqSINegEcDgo0OnBIZYQvTaptkRI&e=" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=IPeeS727VSPyw6EopaZqiSVdGmc7CU9_kkXYW3JiLjE&s=xohs2ScA5mgcD6vDqSINegEcDgo0OnBIZYQvTaptkRI&e=" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</span></blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div><span class="">
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">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>
<br></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>