<div dir="ltr"><div>Dear Martin,</div><div>I have been dealing with the issue of "shall", should, would could might may for forthy years</div><div>I belive that " may "deals with the prevailing circumostances that we do not know yet</div><div>However, I coud agree to replace " may" by "should " at the extreme case.</div><div>In addition we need to clearly indicate the minimum no. of SO/AC below which the entire process is legally invalid</div><div>Kavouss </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-02-29 10:14 GMT+01:00 Martin Boyle <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Martin.Boyle@nominet.uk" target="_blank">Martin.Boyle@nominet.uk</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">
<div>In this case one support and two deeply divided would trounce one opposition even if there is no actual majority of SO/AC?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As I noted yesterday, there is a fundamental difference between no opposition because we don't see the issue causing that led to the process as one that impacts us, so we don't want to support or prevent its resolution and no opposition
because the SO/AC is too divided to agree a position.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think that would worry me!</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Martin <br>
<br>
<br>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Martin Boyle<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Senior Policy Advisor<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)"><br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Sent from my iPhone</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)"><img width="165" height="23" alt="cid:image001.jpg@01D0FCF7.DEE0F1F0"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0pt"><font color="#000000"><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)"><a href="http://nominet.uk/" target="_blank"><b>nominet.uk</b></a><b> </b>DD: <a href="tel:+44%20(0)1865%20332251" target="_blank">+44
(0)1865 332251</a><u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Minerva House, Edmund Halley Road, Oxford, OX4 4DQ, United Kingdom</span></p>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div><div><div class="h5">
<div><br>
On 29 Feb 2016, at 01:06, Drazek, Keith <<a href="mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com" target="_blank">kdrazek@verisign.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div><span></span></div>
<div>
<div>Hi Bruce,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks for your reply.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I agree fully there needs to be a minimum. Speaking personally, I think 4 SO/ACs should be the minimum level of participation, with 3 of those 4 in support/not objecting required to use the powers. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I hope we can all confirm a common understanding so the bylaw drafters will have clear and unambiguous direction.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regards,</div>
<div>Keith<br>
<br>
</div>
<div><br>
On Feb 27, 2016, at 6:03 PM, Bruce Tonkin <<a href="mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au" target="_blank">Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Hello Keith,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">I assume there also needs to be some lower limit of participants that applies to the concept of “</span><i><span lang="EN-US" style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">preventing
the need for unanimous support”.</span></i><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Taking an extreme case, what if only one SO or AC “chooses” to be part of the decisional process? Every decision taken would be unanimous
by default. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">How many participants of the 7 SOs and ACs makes a viable Empowered Community? Should it be 2, 3, or 4. I hope we get at least 4 out
of 7 for it to genuinely represent a significant portion of the community.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">So rather than “If fewer than 5”, it could be “If at least 4”<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Regards,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Bruce Tonkin<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="545551087__MailEndCompose"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></a></p>
<div>
<div style="border-width:1pt medium medium;border-style:solid none none;border-color:rgb(225,225,225) currentColor currentColor;padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Drazek, Keith<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, 28 February 2016 7:04 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [CCWG-ACCT] Request for Clarification on Threshold Issue<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Hi Thomas, Mathieu and Leon. I’m submitting the following on behalf of the undersigned members/participants from the GNSO:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">---------------------------------------------<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Dear CCWG-Accountability Chairs,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">We are very concerned with the response of the Board to the request for clarification regarding the need to adjust the thresholds for the Empowered
Community to exercise its powers if the number of decisional participants is less than 5 SOACs. Currently the text in Annex 1 and 2 regarding this possibility is ambiguous:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:2.25pt;margin-left:36pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">“The thresholds presented in this document were determined based on this assessment. If fewer than
five of ICANN’s SOs and ACs agree to be decisional Participants, these thresholds for consensus support may be adjusted. Thresholds may also have to be adjusted if ICANN changes to have more SOs or ACs.”<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">In our view, there is no question that the thresholds
<i>must</i> be adjusted if there are fewer than five decisional participants. We have acknowledged repeatedly and operated under the assumption that there should not be a requirement of unanimous support for the Empowered Community to exercise its powers. Yet,
if there are less than five decisional participants, unless the thresholds are adjusted it would require unanimous support for the Empowered Community to:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Symbol;font-size:11pt"><span>·<span style="font:7pt/normal "Times New Roman";font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Reject a proposed Operating Plan/Strategic Plan/Budget;<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Symbol;font-size:11pt"><span>·<span style="font:7pt/normal "Times New Roman";font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Recall the entire Board of Directors; and<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:Symbol;font-size:11pt"><span>·<span style="font:7pt/normal "Times New Roman";font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Reject an ICANN Board decision relating to reviews of IANA functions, including the triggering of any PTI separation process.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">These powers are central to ensuring that ICANN remains accountable to the Empowered Community. This matter is too critical to the primary purpose
of the CCWG-Accountability proposal to remain unclear. As the Board has noted in its own formal comments, “Leaving this issue for future consideration raises the potential for renegotiation of the community thresholds. This potential for renegotiation adds
a level of instability and a lack of predictability.”<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Although it has a superficial resemblance to the recent debate over thresholds in the GAC carve-out, we believe it is fundamentally different. There
is a great distinction between an SO or AC <b><i>choosing</i></b> to not participate, and an SO or AC being
<b><i>blocked</i></b> from participation in a specific instance, as was the case in the case of the GAC carve-out. We were willing to accept a unanimous threshold for Board recall in the unique circumstances of the GAC carve-out, where the GAC was blocked from
participation, but we believe firmly that if any SO or AC <b><i>elects</i></b>, whether through a conscious decision or an inability to decide, to not participate, then the non-unanimity principle must be upheld.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">However, as we saw with the debate over the thresholds in the GAC carve-out, this could be a contentious issue. It is far better to resolve this
matter now (and during the drafting of bylaws), prior to the official transfer of the proposal to NTIA, than to delay it when it could have significant negative ramifications on the transition through a failure to resolve it during the implementation phase.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Therefore, we respectfully request that the current text in Annex 1 and Annex 2 be edited to replace “may” with “shall” and add an additional explanatory
clause:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">“The thresholds presented in this document were determined based on this assessment. If fewer than five of ICANN’s SOs
and ACs agree to be decisional Participants, these thresholds for consensus support
</span><b><i><span lang="EN-US" style="color:red;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">shall</span></i></b><span lang="EN-US" style="color:red;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">
</span><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">be adjusted
</span><b><i><span lang="EN-US" style="color:red;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">to prevent the need for unanimous support among the decisional Participants to exercise any of the seven Community powers</span></i></b><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">.
Thresholds may also have to be adjusted if ICANN changes to have more SOs or ACs.”<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Signed,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Phil Corwin<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Steve DelBianco<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Keith Drazek<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">James Gannon<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Robin Gross<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Ed Morris<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Brett Schaefer<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Greg Shatan<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt">Matthew Shears<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="color:rgb(31,73,125);font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list</span><br>
<span><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a></span><br>
<span><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a></span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span></span><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list</span><br>
<span><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a></span><br>
<span><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a></span><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</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" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>