<p dir="ltr">Hi Andrew,</p>
<p dir="ltr">Hopefully part of my message is not quoted to imply I support changing the report(it's rather to raise the obvious implication of opening up an already submitted report). However, just to remove any doubt, It's a +1 from me on what you have said as well.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Cheers!</p>
<p dir="ltr">Sent from my LG G4<br>
Kindly excuse brevity and typos</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 26 Apr 2016 14:35, "Andrew Sullivan" <<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 12:29:30PM +0100, Seun Ojedeji wrote:<br>
> if there is consensus (based on CCWG charter) to change the report that was<br>
> already submitted in the manner proposed then i am fine with it as well.<br>
<br>
I am under the impression that, regardless of its consensus,<br>
CCWG-Accountability can't change the report. The report's been<br>
shipped off. It's the report that people are evaluating, not the<br>
state of CCWG consensus at any given time.<br>
<br>
This is why I have expressed, in some cases strongly, rather serious<br>
reservations about the way "implementation" has proceeded such that<br>
some things the CCWG said may be being adjusted. Most serious, in my<br>
opinion, is the continued inclusion of 1.1(d) in the draft bylaws.<br>
1.1(d)(ii) includes references to documents that aren't written and<br>
can't possibly be evaluated. It even includes a reference to an<br>
agreement between ICANN and an entity that does not yet exist and that<br>
might not be named as it is named in these draft bylaws. The idea<br>
that one can evaluate such a bylaw is, quite frankly, stupefying. Yet<br>
the inclusion of this provision means that the to-be-written contract<br>
(or under (F) any renewal thereof) can include any provision at all,<br>
and it won't be subject to challenge.<br>
<br>
The CCWG can't change its report now, and it must ensure that the<br>
bylaws actually conform with the report as it is written. If this<br>
creates facts that people are unhappy with, well, that's what<br>
amendment procedures are for. We'll get to see whether the Empowered<br>
Community actually can work as a community.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
<br>
A<br>
<br>
--<br>
Andrew Sullivan<br>
<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a><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>
</blockquote></div>