<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Tatiana,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Thanks for bringing this to my attention.  Gmail &quot;clipped&quot; the email, cutting off the rest of the information, and I didn&#39;t notice that it had done so.  I&#39;ve now &quot;shown&quot; myself the &quot;clipped information and I&#39;ll re-run and repost my data.</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><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Dr. Tatiana Tropina <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:t.tropina@mpicc.de" target="_blank">t.tropina@mpicc.de</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
  
    
  
  <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    Greg, <br>
    <br>
    thanks for your great efforts to provide us with the results
    distribution, but I would like to ask what&#39;s the matter with Poll
    #4. I might be missing something, but why according to your results
    it is only NCSG? The results that were sent to us in the email
    (which you are citing as well, when one scrolls down) include not
    only NCSG: <br><span class="">
    <br>
    <b>Poll #4 – Who supports sending the report to Chartering
      Organizations as it is currently, (i.e. the 19 February version
      with the full text in Paragraph 72)?</b><br>
    <br></span><span class="">
    1.    Aarti Bhavana (NCSG – Participant)<br>
    2.    Brett Schaefer (NCSG – Participant)<br>
    3.    Edward Morris (NCSG – Participant)<br>
    4.    Farzaneh Badii (NCSG – Participant)<br>
    5.    James Gannon (NCSG – Participant)<br></span>
    6.    Jordan Carter (<b>ccNSO</b> – Member)<span class=""><br>
    7.    Martin Boyle (<b>ccNSO</b> – Participant)<br>
    8.    Matthew Shears (NCSG – Participant)<br>
    9.    Malcolm Hutty (<b>ISPCP</b> – Participant)<br></span><span class="">
    10. Milton Mueller (NCSG – Participant)<br>
    11. Paul Rosenzweig (NCSG – Participant)<br>
    12. Robin Gross (NCSG – Member)<br>
    13. Stephen Deerhake (<b>ccNSO</b> – Participant)<br>
    14. Tatiana Tropina (NCSG – Participant)<br>
    <br></span>
    Am I confusing things? Would be grateful if you clarify this.<br>
    Thanks!<br>
    <br>
    Tanya <br><div><div class="h5">
    <br>
    <br>
    <div>On 23/02/16 18:09, Greg Shatan wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite">
      
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">All:</div>
        <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I&#39;d like to offer an
          observation on the polls and a path to interpreting them.</div>
        <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">The distribution of
          voters among groups was fairly skewed.  Having 11 Board
          members present (and voting) was remarkable, but there were
          other imbalances in stakeholder structure representation that
          also tended to skew the results.  I prepared the attached
          charts to track and control for these imbalanced
          distributions.  The bottom line is that support for the 4
          polls was as follows, if broken down by stakeholder structure
          (i.e., without giving weight to multiple votes from the same
          structure).</div>
        <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><b>REMOVING THE
            LANGUAGE (“If the IRP is not available to challenge the
            Board action in question”)</b></div>
        <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
            sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div class="gmail_default">
          <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif">Poll
              #3 – Who supports removing the language in the 2nd bullet
              in Paragraph 72 (in red on the slide), (“If the IRP is not
              available to challenge the Board action in question”)?<br>
            </font></div>
          <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><b><font color="#ff0000">10</font></b> (GAC, ccNSO, ALAC, NCSG,
              RySG, RrSG, BC, IPC, Board, Staff)</font></div>
          <div><br>
          </div>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
            sans-serif">Poll #1 – Who objects to removing the 2nd bullet
            in Paragraph 72 (in red on the slide), (“If the IRP is not
            available to challenge the Board action in question”)?</font><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
            sans-serif"><b><font color="#ff0000">3</font></b> (ccNSO,
            NCSG, ISPCP)</font></div>
        <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
            sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div class="gmail_default">
          <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><b>SENDING
                THE REPORT &quot;AS IS&quot;</b></font></div>
          <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><br>
            </font></div>
          <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif">Poll
              #4 – Who supports sending the report to Chartering
              Organizations as it is currently, (i.e. the 19 February
              version with the full text in Paragraph 72)?<br>
            </font></div>
          <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana, sans-serif"><b><font color="#ff0000">1</font></b> in support (NCSG)</font></div>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
            sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
            sans-serif">Poll #2 – Who objects to sending the report
            forward (to Chartering Organizations) as it is currently,
            (i.e. the 19 February version with the full text in
            Paragraph 72)?<br>
          </font></div>
        <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
            sans-serif"><b><font color="#ff0000">6</font></b> (GAC,
            ccNSO, ALAC, RySG, Board, Staff)</font></div>
        <div class="gmail_default"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_default">One can parse the data
          further, and one can decide how to deal with split structures
          (e.g., 2 of 3 structures having participants objecting to
          removing the language in Poll #1 also had participants
          supporting removing the language) and with whether Steve
          DelBianco should be counted as a &quot;BC&quot; vote when he was voting
          as the appointed representative of the CSG, and whether Staff
          votes should count at all and whether Member votes should
          count more.  But I decided to keep it simple and let the data
          speak for themselves.</div>
        <div class="gmail_default"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_default">Greg</div>
        <div class="gmail_default"><font face="verdana,
            sans-serif"><br>
          </font></div>
        <div class="gmail_default"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_default"><br>
        </div>
      </div>
      <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Edward
          Morris <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net" target="_blank">egmorris1@toast.net</a>&gt;</span>
          wrote:<br>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,Sans-Serif;font-size:12px">
              <div>+1</div>
              <div> </div>
              <div> </div>
              <div> </div>
              <hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
              <div><span style="font-family:tahoma,arial,sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><b>From</b>:
                  &quot;Salaets, Ken&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:ksalaets@itic.org" target="_blank">ksalaets@itic.org</a>&gt;<br>
                  <b>Sent</b>: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 2:52 PM<br>
                  <b>To</b>: &quot;Roelof Meijer&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl" target="_blank"></a><a href="mailto:Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl" target="_blank">Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl</a>&gt;<br>
                  <b>Cc</b>: &quot;<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>&quot;
                  &lt;<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>&gt;<span><br>
                    <b>Subject</b>: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Poll results</span></span>
                <div> </div>
                <div>
                  <div>
                    Roelof et al., if there wasn&#39;t consensus for
                    including the second &#39;exception,&#39; then where did it
                    come from and why was it included in the 19 Feb.
                    draft? This is what&#39;s perplexing.<br>
                    <br>
                    Second, the co-chairs and CCWG process clearly
                    aren&#39;t following anything close to the classic sense
                    of the term &#39;consensus,&#39; but frankly, it is nigh
                    impossible to determine what metric is being
                    followed. Indeed, one could easily get the
                    impression we are embracing a floating definition,
                    so to speak, the metric for which is convenience
                    rather than consistency. Hence, it sets the table
                    for confusion and second-guessing, both of which are
                    bait for those inclined to question this entire
                    endeavor.<br>
                    <br>
                    I agree with the expressions of frustration voiced
                    here, i.e., that process violations are allowed on a
                    frequent basis and then unevenly, with some voices
                    deemed &#39;louder&#39; than others. I am not arguing for or
                    against the merits of this particular latest debate,
                    mind you, but when the process being employed comes
                    across as &#39;winging it&#39; - or worse - it raises
                    inevitable questions regarding the overall integrity
                    of this important exercise.<br>
                    <br>
                    I greatly admire the endurance of everyone involved,
                    including and especially the co-chairs. I would only
                    urge you, however, to absolutely ensure that every
                    participant and organization engaged in this
                    activity is held to the same standard. Doing
                    anything less will make the outcome all the more
                    difficult to justify and defend here in Washington.<br>
                    <br>
                    Happy Tuesday.<br>
                    <br>
                    Ken<br>
                    <br>
                    &gt; On Feb 23, 2016, at 8:50 AM, Roelof Meijer &lt;<a href="mailto:Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl" target="_blank"></a><a href="mailto:Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl" target="_blank">Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl</a>&gt;
                    wrote:<br>
                    &gt;<br>
                    &gt; Where it leaves us, I think is clear. We just
                    follow our common practice:<br>
                    &gt; if we have no (rough) consensus on inserting a
                    particular clause or<br>
                    &gt; solution in our proposal, we do not put it in.
                    Item (2) was inserted a few<br>
                    &gt; weeks ago, we do not have anything close to
                    rough consensus to support<br>
                    &gt; that. So it should be taken out.<br>
                    &gt;<br>
                    &gt;<br>
                    &gt; Best,<br>
                    &gt;<br>
                    &gt; Roelof<br>
                    &gt;<br>
                    &gt;<br>
                    &gt;<br>
                    &gt;<br>
                    &gt; On 23-02-16 12:39, &quot;<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>
                    on<br>
                    &gt; behalf of Dr Eberhard W Lisse&quot;<br>
                    &gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>
                    on behalf of<br>
                    &gt; <a href="mailto:el@lisse.na" target="_blank">el@lisse.na</a>&gt;
                    wrote:<br>
                    &gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt; Grace,<br>
                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt; thank you.<br>
                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt; Dear Co-Chairs,<br>
                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt; As mentioned in the chat I had to leave
                    after one hour (of which 22<br>
                    &gt;&gt; were taken by a summary, for which I
                    expected an Executive Summary of<br>
                    &gt;&gt; 2 minutes or less, by the way) as I have to
                    work for a living.<br>
                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt; Just for the record, sending it to the SOs
                    is not the same as<br>
                    &gt;&gt; supporting it, hence your careful language
                    reflects my proxy with the<br>
                    &gt;&gt; exception of Poll 4 where he only polled as
                    participant but should<br>
                    &gt;&gt; have also polled my member proxy in favor
                    of submitting as is.<br>
                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt; That said, it is disturbing that 11 Board
                    members and even staff<br>
                    &gt;&gt; participated in the poll.<br>
                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt; Never mind the expected outcome from the
                    ACs.<br>
                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt; It is however clear that we do NOT have
                    Consensus as required by our<br>
                    &gt;&gt; Charter.<br>
                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt; So, where does this leave us?<br>
                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt; el<br>
                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; On 2016-02-23 12:26, Grace Abuhamad
                    wrote:<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; Dear all,<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; To ensure full transparency around the
                    polling, the staff have<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; reviewed the recording for the call and
                    crosschecked the results.<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; The Adobe Connect recording is
                    available here for your viewing as<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; well: <a href="https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p2ner13u4kd/" target="_blank">https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p2ner13u4kd/</a>.<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; Please note that the instructions
                    regarding participation in the polls<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; were as follows:<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; · Anyone on the call was invited to
                    participate in the poll<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; (members &amp; participants).<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; · To participate, participants in the
                    Adobe Connect room used<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; either a red or green tick to respond
                    to the poll question.<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; · Those on audio-only could express
                    their position over the phone.<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; · After the polls, analysis would be
                    conducted to assess<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; participation from CCWG members (for
                    the purposes of these results, the<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; members¹ names are in bold font).<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; The Chairs conducted four polls in a
                    group that varied between 85-90<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; participants. The text used as the
                    basis for the polls is Paragraph<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 72 of the CCWG report (see attached
                    slide for the text as well as<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; the 2^nd bullet highlighted in red).
                    The first two poll questions<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; were based on objections and the second
                    two poll questions were<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; based on expressions of support.<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; *Summary of results: *<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; · 11 objections to removing the 2^nd
                    bullet in Paragraph 72 (in red<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; on the slide)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; o (2 CCWG member objections)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; · 27 objections to sending the report
                    forward as it is currently,<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; with the full text in Paragraph 72<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; o (8 CCWG member objections, including
                    all ALAC members)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; · 36 support removing the language in
                    the 2^nd bullet in Paragraph<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 72 (in red on the slide)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; o (10 CCWG members supporting)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; · 14 support sending the report forward
                    as it is currently, with<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; the full text in Paragraph 72<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; o (2 CCWG members supporting)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; *Detailed results: *<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; *Poll #1*­ Who objects to removing the
                    2^nd bullet in Paragraph 72 (in<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; red on the slide), (³If the IRP is not
                    available to challenge the Board<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; action in question²)?<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 1. Brett Schaefer (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 2. Edward Morris (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 3. Farzaneh Badii (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 4. James Gannon (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 5. Malcolm Hutty (ISPCP ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 6. Milton Mueller (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 7. Paul Rosenzweig (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 8. *Robin Gross*(NCSG ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 9. Stephen Deerhake (ccNSO ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 10.Tatiana Tropina (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 11.*Eberhard Lisse*(ccNSO ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; *Poll #2*­ Who objects to sending the
                    report forward (to Chartering<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; Organizations) as it is currently,
                    (i.e. the 19 February version with<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; the full text in Paragraph 72)?<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 1. *Alan Greenberg*(ALAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 2. Asha Hemrajani (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 3. Cherine Chalaby (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 4. *Cheryl Langdon-Orr*(ALAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 5. Chris Disspain (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 6. David McAuley (GNSO ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 7. Fadi Chehade (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 8. George Sadowsky (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 9. Jorge Cancio (GAC ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 10.*Julia Wolman*(GAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 11.Keith Drazek (RySG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 12.*Leon Sanchez*(ALAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 13.Lito Ibarra (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 14.Louisewies Van del Laan (ICANN Board
                    ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 15.Markus Kummer (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 16.*Olga Cavalli*(GAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 17.Olivier Crepin-Leblond (ALAC ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 18.Pedro da Silva (GAC ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 19.Rafael Perez Galindo (GAC ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 20.Rinalia Abdul Rahim (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 21.*Roelof Meijer*(ccNSO ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 22.Ron da Silva (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 23.Samantha Eisner (ICANN Staff
                    Liaison)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 24.Seun Ojedeji (ALAC ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 25.Steve Crocker (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 26.*Sebastien Bachollet*(ALAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 27.Stephen Deerhake (ccNSO ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 28.Tarek Kamel (ICANN Staff ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 29.*Tijani Ben Jemaa*(ALAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; *Poll #3*­ Who supports removing the
                    language in the 2^nd bullet in<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; Paragraph 72 (in red on the slide),
                    (³If the IRP is not available to<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; challenge the Board action in
                    question²)?<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 1. *Alan**Greenberg* (ALAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 2. Annaliese Williams (GAC ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 3. Asha Hemrajani (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 4. Avri Doria (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 5. Cherine Chalaby (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 6. *Cheryl Langdon-Orr*(ALAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 7. Chris Disspain (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 8. David McAuley (GNSO ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 9. Fadi Chehade (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 10.Finn Petersen (GAC ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 11.George Sadowsky (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 12.Greg Shatan (IPC ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 13.*James Bladel*(RrSG ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 14.*Julia**Wolman* (GAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 15.Kavouss Arasteh (GAC ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 16.Keith Drazek (RySG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 17.*Leon**Sanchez* (ALAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 18.Lito Ibarra (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 19.Louisewies Van del Laan (ICANN Board
                    ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 20.Mark Carvell (GAC ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 21.Markus Kummer (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 22.Mary Uduma (ccNSO ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 23.Niels Ten Oever (Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 30.*Olga**Cavalli* (GAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 24.Olivier Crepin-Leblond (ALAC ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 25.Paul Szyndler (ccNSO ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 26.Pedro da Silva (GAC ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 31.Rafael Perez Galindo (GAC ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 27.Rinalia Abdul Rahim (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 28.*Roelof**Meijer* (ccNSO ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 29.Ron da Silva (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 30.Sabine Meyer (GAC ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 31.Seun Ojedeji (ALAC ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 32.Steve Crocker (ICANN Board ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 33.*Steve DelBianco*(CSG ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 34.*Sebastien**Bachollet* (ALAC ­
                    Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 35.Tarek Kamel (ICANN Staff)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 36.*Tijani**Ben Jemaa* (ALAC ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; *Poll #4*­ Who supports sending the
                    report to Chartering Organizations<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; as it is currently, (i.e. the 19
                    February version with the full text in<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; Paragraph 72)?<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 1. Aarti Bhavana (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 2. Brett Schaefer (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 3. Edward Morris (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 4. Farzaneh Badii (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 5. James Gannon (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 6. *Jordan Carter*(ccNSO ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 7. Martin Boyle (ccNSO ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 8. Matthew Shears (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 9. Malcolm Hutty (ISPCP ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 10.Milton Mueller (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 11.Paul Rosenzweig (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 12.*Robin**Gross* (NCSG ­ Member)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 13.Stephen Deerhake (ccNSO ­
                    Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; 14.Tatiana Tropina (NCSG ­ Participant)<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt;
                    _______________________________________________<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; Accountability-Cross-Community mailing
                    list<br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
                    &gt;&gt;&gt; <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                    &gt;&gt; --<br>
                    &gt;&gt; Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician
                    &amp; Gynaecologist (Saar)<br>
                    &gt;&gt; <a href="mailto:el@lisse.NA" target="_blank">el@lisse.NA</a> / * | Telephone: <a href="tel:%2B264%2081%20124%206733" value="+264811246733" target="_blank">+264 81 124
                      6733</a> (cell)<br>
                    &gt;&gt; PO Box 8421 \ /<br>
                    &gt;&gt; Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/<br>
                    &gt;&gt;
                    _______________________________________________<br>
                    &gt;&gt; Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
                    &gt;&gt; <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
                    &gt;&gt; <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
                    &gt;<br>
                    &gt; _______________________________________________<br>
                    &gt; Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
                    &gt; <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
                    &gt; <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><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" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
                     </div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </span>
            <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>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre>_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </div></div></div>

<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>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>