[CWG-Stewardship] ICANN Board as "regulator" (was: A liaison from the Board to CWG)

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:27:22PM -0500, Greg Shatan wrote:
> If you look at the Charters for the two WGs, you will see that there is an
> accountability piece for this WG and an (admittedly much broader)
> accountability piece for the other WG.  This is not the "non-accountability
> WG."  Figuring out how to apply the dividing line may be more art than
> science, and needs to be pragmatic rather than doctrinaire, but should at
> least use the Charters as a starting point.

Yes, and what I'm arguing is that, as a practical matter, what we
should do is pick the very minimum we can, because it's nearly the end
of February and this WG was supposed to have finished already.  So,
specifying the necessary and sufficient conditions of accountability
necessary for the transition, and _not_ specifying how those
conditions are to be achived (leaving that for a WG that is busy
working on exactly those issues) seems to me to be a pragmatic
approach.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com