<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;">
<div>Colleagues:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The discussion around this has been extremely valuable, and big thanks for all of those who weighed in. I apologize for taking so long to weigh in, but I was watching some of the keynote speeches here at NamesCon (include Paul’s. Nice job!). In any
event, my thoughts are below.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>What is the purpose of tomorrow’s call?</b></div>
<div>The GNSO Council will send its unified position on the CCWG-Accountability recommendations to the co-chairs of the CCWG. We will achieve this by reviewing, discussing and approving the Consolidated document that was prepared by the SubTeam.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>Should we do this now, or wait for the final CCWG Recommendations?</b></div>
<div>It seems increasingly likely that there will be a new set of modified CCWG Recommendations in the near future. However, if we want to help shape the next report to ensure it reflects the views of the GNSO Community, we need to comment on this set of Recommendations
now. Doing so will also provide guidance & support to the GNSO members of the CCWG-ACCT in their work to drive the best outcomes.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>Are we voting, or drafting a letter, or what?</b></div>
<div>This is an open question for tomorrow’s call. Some have indicated a preference for a less formal (letter) response, similar to what we’ve seen from the ccNSO. Others have noted that something this important would benefit from an itemized expression of
support/non-support. The CCWG co-chairs, and the CCWG charter, appear to favor the latter, and certainly a formal vote will be required for the Final Recommendations. My hope is that we are able to resolve this tomorrow, but if necessary we can vote on whether
or not we need to vote (!).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>If we do vote, then what is the vote about? What are we voting on? How will this go down?</b></div>
<div>If we proceed with a vote, then the Councilors will be asked whether or not they agree with the Subteam’s analysis & consolidation of the public comments filed by the SGs and CS. In other words, we will be voting on the —language— of the response, NOT
the response itself. Example: If the Subteam reports that the GNSO opposes a recommendation, a “Yes” vote will agree with that statement of GNSO opposition, not the recommendation itself. Hopefully this will become clearer tomorrow as we walk through the
document.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>What if we can’t agree?</b></div>
<div>If we cannot reach consensus (either via discussion or voting) on the GNSO response to any recommendation, then we will refer the CCWG Co-Chairs back to the individual comments filed by the SGs and Cs. I believe there are a few (2-3) areas in the report
where this may be the case. But generally speaking, the Subteam found a great deal of overlap in SG/C positions, and when those comments included qualifiers or conditions, those were usually not in conflict. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:11pt; text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span><<a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>> on behalf of Edward Morris <<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net">egmorris1@toast.net</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Reply-To: </span>"<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net">egmorris1@toast.net</a>" <<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net">egmorris1@toast.net</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span>Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 8:40 <br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span>Johan Helsingius <<a href="mailto:julf@julf.com">julf@julf.com</a>>, Amr Elsadr <<a href="mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org">aelsadr@egyptig.org</a>>, Marika Konings <<a href="mailto:marika.konings@icann.org">marika.konings@icann.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Cc: </span>WUKnoben <<a href="mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de">wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de</a>>, GNSO Council List <<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span>Re: [council] Motion for GNSO Consideration of the CCWG Accountability Third Draft Report<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">
<div>Hi Marika,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I'm very appreciative of your efforts to make us aware of the approach the CCNSO took. We need all the input we can get. Now if you could do the same for the GAC I think we all would be double appreciative! (we're still waiting for some smoke signals from
our government colleagues).</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. I definitely think we should be taking an up and down vote on each of the recommendations. I referenced the sub-teams work only to suggest that format - response by recommendation - be used going forward. Thanks for letting
me know that I wasn't clear and giving me the chance to clear up any misunderstanding.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ed</div>
<div style="-webkit-touch-callout: none; -webkit-user-select: none; -khtml-user-select: none;-moz-user-select: none;-ms-user-select: none;-o-user-select: none;user-select: none;">
</div>
<div> </div>
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%">
<div><span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><b>From</b>: "Marika Konings" <<a href="mailto:marika.konings@icann.org">marika.konings@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Sent</b>: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 4:27 PM<br>
<b>To</b>: "Edward Morris" <<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net">egmorris1@toast.net</a>>, "Johan Helsingius" <<a href="mailto:julf@julf.com">julf@julf.com</a>>, "Amr Elsadr" <<a href="mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org">aelsadr@egyptig.org</a>><br>
<b>Cc</b>: "WUKnoben" <<a href="mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de">wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de</a>>, "GNSO Council List" <<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject</b>: Re: [council] Motion for GNSO Consideration of the CCWG Accountability Third Draft Report</span>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks, Ed. I didn’t mean to imply that the ccNSO response was the way to go, I thought it just might be of interest to see how other chartering organisations in addition to the ALAC approached it.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>As a point of clarification, are you suggesting that an up / down vote would be taken on the response provided by the sub-team, not necessarily the recommendations themselves? I thought you were suggesting the latter in your initial email, but your last
paragraph in this section makes me think you are suggesting the former?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Best regards,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Marika</div>
<div> </div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"></span>
<div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:11pt; text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span><<a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>> on behalf of Edward Morris <<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net">egmorris1@toast.net</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Reply-To: </span>Edward Morris <<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net">egmorris1@toast.net</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span>Wednesday 13 January 2016 at 17:16<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span>Johan Helsingius <<a href="mailto:julf@julf.com">julf@julf.com</a>>, Amr Elsadr <<a href="mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org">aelsadr@egyptig.org</a>>, Marika Konings <<a href="mailto:marika.konings@icann.org">marika.konings@icann.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Cc: </span>WUKnoben <<a href="mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de">wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de</a>>, GNSO Council List <<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span>Re: [council] Motion for GNSO Consideration of the CCWG Accountability Third Draft Report</span></div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"></span>
<div> </div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"></span>
<div>
<div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">Hi Marika,</span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">Thanks for this. That certainly is an approach we could take but I question it's overall utility to those of us in the CCWG who are attempting to put
together a proposal all of the chartering organisations can support.</span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">I would refer everyone to the CCWG Charter ( ), specifically:</span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">---</span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">SO and AC support for the Draft Proposal(s)<br>
Following submission of the Draft Proposal(s), each of the chartering organizations shall, in accordance with their own rules and procedures, review and discuss the Draft Proposal(s) and decide whether to adopt the recommendations contained in it. The chairs
of the chartering organizations shall notify the co-chairs of the WG of the result of the deliberations as soon as feasible.<br>
<br>
Supplemental Draft Proposal<br>
In the event that one or more of the participating SO’s or AC’s do(es) not adopt one or more of the recommendation(s) contained in the Draft Proposal(s), the Co-Chairs of the CCWG-Accountability shall be notified accordingly. This notification shall include
at a minimum the reasons for the lack of support and a suggested alternative that would be acceptable, if any. The CCWG-Accountability may, at its discretion, reconsider, post for public comments and/or submit to the chartering organizations a Supplemental
Draft Proposal, which takes into accounting the concerns raised.<br>
<br>
Following submission of the Supplemental Draft Proposal, the chartering organizations shall discuss and decide in accordance with its own rules and procedures whether to adopt the recommendations contained in the Supplemental Draft Proposal. The Chairs of the
chartering organizations shall notify the Co-Chairs of the CCWG-Accountability of the result of the deliberations as soon as feasible.</span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">---</span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">With the exception of its referral to the CWG requirements, I don't find the CCNSO response to be particularly helpful. Provisional support of the
"direction of travel" doesn't tell the CCWG if we need to change some specifics of any of our recommendations. If the CCNSO is prepared to support all the recommendations save those related to the CWG they should say so. What we're trying to avoid is a situation
where only on the final vote of approval / disapproval do we become aware of a Chartering organisations problems with a specific recommendation. As I understand things, that actually is the purpose of the special attention being paid to the Chartering organisations
in this round of public comments. Although there are some tweaks that probably should be made, I do largely support the work of the Council sub-team and the result of their efforts and hope that is the basis of our discussion and response.</span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">Best,</span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">Ed</span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-touch-callout: none; -webkit-user-select: none; -khtml-user-select: none;-moz-user-select: none;-ms-user-select: none;-o-user-select: none;user-select: none;">
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%">
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><b>From</b>: "Marika Konings" <<a href="mailto:marika.konings@icann.org">marika.konings@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Sent</b>: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 3:39 PM<br>
<b>To</b>: "Edward Morris" <<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net">egmorris1@toast.net</a>>, "Johan Helsingius" <<a href="mailto:julf@julf.com">julf@julf.com</a>>, "Amr Elsadr" <<a href="mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org">aelsadr@egyptig.org</a>><br>
<b>Cc</b>: "WUKnoben" <<a href="mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de">wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de</a>>, "GNSO Council List" <<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject</b>: Re: [council] Motion for GNSO Consideration of the CCWG Accountability Third Draft Report</span></span></span>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"></span></span>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">You may also be interested to see the approach the ccNSO Council took in their comments on the third draft proposal: <a href="http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/ccwg-draft-3-proposal-07jan16-en.pdf">http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/ccwg-draft-3-proposal-07jan16-en.pdf</a>.</span></span></div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"></span></span>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"></span></span>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">Best regards,</span></span></div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"></span></span>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"></span></span>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">Marika</span></span></div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"></span></span>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"></span></span>
<div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:11pt; text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-weight:bold">From:
</span><<a href="mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org">owner-council@gnso.icann.org</a>> on behalf of Edward Morris <<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net">egmorris1@toast.net</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Reply-To: </span>Edward Morris <<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net">egmorris1@toast.net</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span>Wednesday 13 January 2016 at 15:42<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span>Johan Helsingius <<a href="mailto:julf@julf.com">julf@julf.com</a>>, Amr Elsadr <<a href="mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org">aelsadr@egyptig.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Cc: </span>WUKnoben <<a href="mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de">wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de</a>>, GNSO Council List <<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span>Re: [council] Motion for GNSO Consideration of the CCWG Accountability Third Draft Report</span></span></span></div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"></span></span>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"></span></span>
<div>
<div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">Hi,</span></span></span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">Other chartering organisations (see, for example,
ALAC: <a href="http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-draft-ccwg-accountability-proposal-30nov15/pdfeO5FTDW5b5.pdf">http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-draft-ccwg-accountability-proposal-30nov15/pdfeO5FTDW5b5.pdf</a> ) have given clear indications of approval
/ disapproval of each of the twelve recommendations, along with reasoning thereof. I'd suggest we do the same. I'm ambivalent as to whether we indicate our preferences in the form of a Motion or a letter from our Chair, but I do believe the CCWG needs the
simplified guidance that only a straight up / down decision on each recommendation can give. </span></span></span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">Ed </span></span></span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></span></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-touch-callout: none; -webkit-user-select: none; -khtml-user-select: none;-moz-user-select: none;-ms-user-select: none;-o-user-select: none;user-select: none;">
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></span></span></div>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></span></span></div>
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%">
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: tahoma,arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><b>From</b>:
"Amr Elsadr" <<a href="mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org">aelsadr@egyptig.org</a>><br>
<b>Sent</b>: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 2:07 PM<br>
<b>To</b>: "Johan Helsingius" <<a href="mailto:julf@julf.com">julf@julf.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc</b>: "WUKnoben" <<a href="mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de">wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de</a>>, "GNSO Council List" <<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject</b>: Re: [council] Motion for GNSO Consideration of the CCWG Accountability Third Draft Report</span></span></span></span></span>
<div><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"> </span></span></span></span></div>
<br>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px">Hi,<br>
<br>
I agree that a formal vote is not absolutely needed at this stage, but I wonder whether or not a formal vote of the 3rd draft recommendations would be helpful to the CCWG. I imagine that it will draw a very clear picture of where the stakeholder groups/constituencies
of one of the CCWG’s chartering organisations stand on each of the recommendations.<br>
<br>
Although these positions have probably been communicated by the appointed members from the GNSO groups, my guess would be that the members of the CCWG may still find a Council vote helpful.<br>
<br>
Just a thought.<br>
<br>
Thanks.<br>
<br>
Amr<br>
<br>
> On Jan 13, 2016, at 3:35 PM, Johan Helsingius <<a href="mailto:julf@julf.com">julf@julf.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> Wolf-Ulrich,<br>
><br>
>> Maybe tomorrow we could sort out and discuss the very last not yet<br>
>> agreeable recs. The formal vote could then be taken at a later stage – maybe<br>
>> even at the council meeting next week.<br>
><br>
> I am not entirely sure why a formal vote is needed now, assuming<br>
> there will have to be one more, final(?) draft - surely what counts<br>
> is the vote on the *final* version. Or am I wrong in my assumptions?<br>
><br>
> Julf<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</span></span></span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px"></span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"></span></div>
</span></div>
</div>
</span>
</body>
</html>