<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>Dear Kavouss,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">you make
the same point I expressed by saying that “I’m still uncertain with
“non-substantive” issues which level of substance may depend on different
views”. I would welcome you providing other more useful criteria to decide in
which rare cases a “poll” or “voting” could apply.</DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000"> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">As you may
have seen in my latest draft I removed the “adjectives” from consensus. So I
would appreciate your written suggestion for an acceptable text that I could
better understand your disagreement with the present proposal.<BR><BR>Best
regards<BR><BR>Wolf-Ulrich<BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com
href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com">Kavouss Arasteh</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, August 14, 2014 7:22 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de
href="mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de">WUKnoben</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Cc:</B> <A title=mueller@syr.edu href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu">Milton L
Mueller</A> ; <A title=Martin.Boyle@nominet.org.uk
href="mailto:Martin.Boyle@nominet.org.uk">Martin Boyle</A> ; <A
title=internal-cg@icann.org href="mailto:internal-cg@icann.org">Coordination
Group</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus building
process</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV>Dear All,</DIV>
<DIV>I am not comfortable to any of these measures.</DIV>
<DIV>The more we discuss and analyze ,the more problem is created.</DIV>
<DIV>I strongly disagree to make any discrimination among the contstituent
groups in ICG ,WHEN IT IS PROPOSED qUOTE</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); LINE-HEIGHT: 115%'>"For
substantive issues, at least none of the “customer groups” (numbers, protocols,
gTLDs or ccTLDs) of the IANA remains strongly opposed"</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); LINE-HEIGHT: 115%'>What
is considered by someone " substantive" may be considered by others " non
substantive,</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); LINE-HEIGHT: 115%'>NO
ADJECTIVE FOR OPPOSITION .NO ADJECTIVE FOR SCONSENSUS.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); LINE-HEIGHT: 115%'>If
you want instead of making progress to draft another chatter or convention for
decision making ,I disagree with that .</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); LINE-HEIGHT: 115%'>It
ios incumbent to the chair and the two vice chairs to make utmost efforts to
build consensus-</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); LINE-HEIGHT: 115%'>Pls
end this discussion</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); LINE-HEIGHT: 115%'>Regards</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); LINE-HEIGHT: 115%'>Kavouss
</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); LINE-HEIGHT: 115%'><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125); LINE-HEIGHT: 115%'><BR></SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_extra><BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>2014-08-14 18:32 GMT+02:00 WUKnoben <SPAN dir=ltr><<A
href="mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de"
target=_blank>wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de</A>></SPAN>:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<DIV lang=EN-US dir=ltr vlink="purple" link="blue">
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)'>
<DIV>Thanks all for your valuable input.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)'>Milton
is right calling for verbal clarity. But differentation is also needed and
there are different approaches to achieve it. And as I said before the
suggestion so far was based on GNSO habit.</DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)'> </DIV>
<DIV style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)'>I
tried to accomodate the discussion and therefore suggest to differentiate
between “recommendation by consensus” (highest level, 100%) and
“recommendation” (all remaining discussion results leading to a
recommendation).</DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)'> </DIV>
<DIV style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)'>I
agree to all basic principles Martin came up with and incorporated them.</DIV>
<DIV style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)'>I’m
still uncertain with “non-substantive” issues which level of substance may
depend on different views.</DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)'> </DIV>
<DIV style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)'>I
would appreciate further fruitful discussion on the list and we will hopefully
see an end at our call next week.</DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)'> </DIV>
<DIV style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0)'>See my
edits attached.<BR><BR>Best regards<BR><BR>Wolf-Ulrich<BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: rgb(245,245,245)">
<DIV><B>From:</B> <A title=mueller@syr.edu href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu"
target=_blank>Milton L Mueller</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, August 12, 2014 8:12 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=Martin.Boyle@nominet.org.uk
href="mailto:Martin.Boyle@nominet.org.uk" target=_blank>'Martin Boyle'</A> ;
<A title=internal-cg@icann.org href="mailto:internal-cg@icann.org"
target=_blank>Coordination Group</A> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=h5>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus building
process</DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV>
<DIV class=h5>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>I
think Martin makes very good points here. <U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>I
like his proposed principles, every one of them. <U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>I
must confess that I have been wincing at the way the word “consensus” is
(ab)used routinely in these circles. Either it is truly consensus, and
everyone either agrees or agrees not to object, or it is _something else_.
Will we please stop trying to apply the term “consensus” to supermajority
voting processes? My academic commitment to verbal clarity and directness is
screaming at me that this is wrong.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>The
IETF concept of “rough” consensus is an informal mechanism that is suitable
for a more homogeneous environment in which adherence to standards is
voluntary anyway, but in an environment with binding outcomes and political
factions, it can and, in the ICANN context, frequently HAS merely provided a
rationalization for ignoring significant minority points of view.
<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>--MM<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-TOP: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; BORDER-LEFT: 1.5pt solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in">
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: rgb(181,196,223) 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in">
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma","sans-serif"'> <A
href="mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org"
target=_blank>internal-cg-bounces@icann.org</A> [mailto:<A
href="mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org"
target=_blank>internal-cg-bounces@icann.org</A>] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Martin
Boyle<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, August 12, 2014 1:24 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
Coordination Group<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus building
process<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><U></U><U></U> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>Hi
All,<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>First
thanks to Wolf-Ulrich for his paper. I greatly like the idea of
standards of good behaviour and mutual respect – and I’m pleased to see that
this is already very much the framework for the way that the ICG works.
I’d also note that the analysis of shades of grey in levels of support is
interesting – was it Patrik who first noted the two extremes (non-substantial
and substantial issues) and the level of consensus that might be needed?
I’m just not sure I know how to use them…<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>I’d
firmly endorse the aim that “the ICG … reach at least Consensus on the
Proposal for the IANA Stewardship Transition to be forwarded to the NTIA”
subject to our continued effort to try to achieve full/unanimous consensus or
(at least) to have addressed address points of
concern.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>However,
I do not like processes that are supposed to be by consensus being resolved by
voting (cf WCIT): voting leaves winners and losers. It also means
that people get lazy and fail to look for compromise or common ground or ways
to address “reasonable” concerns. That aversion is not really addressed
by supermajorities: even at an 80% supermajority, all the domain name
registries or all the government representatives or all GNSO members could be
overruled. At 85% all the ccTLD registries, at 90% all the gTLD
registries could be ignored.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>I
do recognise the need for a mechanism that allows us to come to a final
recommendation and I’m afraid that I do not see any magic wand. But I
would suggest a number of basic principles:<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.25in"><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: symbol; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"><SPAN>·<SPAN
style='FONT: 7pt "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal'>
</SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>The
aim of the discussion should be to try to find a solution where *<B>no member
of the ICG still maintains serious opposition to the outcome.</B>*
Reasons for objections should be given, allowing the ICG wherever possible to
try to address those concerns.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.25in"><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: symbol; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"><SPAN>·<SPAN
style='FONT: 7pt "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal'>
</SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>*<B>Recourse
to any form of voting should be the exception.</B>* Its use might be
fine for non-substantive issues. For substantive issues, at least none
of the “customer groups” (numbers, protocols, gTLDs or ccTLDs) of the IANA
remains strongly opposed.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.25in"><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: symbol; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"><SPAN>·<SPAN
style='FONT: 7pt "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal'>
</SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>Group
members who still have problems with the evaluation should be invited to
*<B>identify possible ways in which the proposal could be modified to make it
acceptable to them.</B>*<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.25in"><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: symbol; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)"><SPAN>·<SPAN
style='FONT: 7pt "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal'>
</SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>Discussions
should continue until *<B>no “IANA customer” group is firmly
opposed.</B>* <U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>One
final point: I would be willing to allow anyone who feels that they have
not been heard to put a minority view into the final report. I’d rather
that did not happen, but if the views are strong enough, it would be best to
have then documented in the report than to be first aired in the discussion
that follows the publication of our final report.<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>Cheers<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'>Martin<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: rgb(31,73,125)'><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: rgb(181,196,223) 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in">
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma","sans-serif"'> <A
href="mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org"
target=_blank>internal-cg-bounces@icann.org</A> [<A
href="mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org"
target=_blank>mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org</A>] <B>On Behalf Of
</B>Kavouss Arasteh<BR><B>Sent:</B> 11 August 2014 20:48<BR><B>To:</B> Drazek,
Keith<BR><B>Cc:</B> Coordination Group<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Internal-cg]
Consensus building process<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB>Dear All,<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB>Undoubtedly, it would be super majority
either 2/3 or 4/5 .<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB>Kavouss
<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><SPAN
lang=EN-GB><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB>2014-08-11 18:18 GMT+02:00 Drazek, Keith
<<A href="mailto:kdrazek@verisign.com"
target=_blank>kdrazek@verisign.com</A>>:<U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB>I agree that we will need a clear process
for determining consensus that falls somewhere on the spectrum between humming
and requiring a unanimous vote.<BR><BR>If we get in to discussions of voting,
we'll also need to address the thresholds required to establish consensus. Is
it a simple majority? Super-majority? Unanimous voting is an unhelpful
requirement that would likely obstruct our work and our ability to deliver, so
I believe that should be a non-starter for the ICG. We need to avoid the
possibility of one dissenting vote undermining an otherwise strongly supported
recommendation that represents broad community consensus.<BR><BR>However,
if/when there is not full consensus, it will be important that we have a
mechanism for expressing dissenting opinions. The GNSO Registries Stakeholder
Group employs a "minority statement" mechanism to allow for all views to be
expressed when there is consensus but not unanimity on a particular topic.
Perhaps we should consider a similar mechanism for the ICG.<BR><SPAN
style="COLOR: rgb(136,136,136)"><BR><SPAN>Keith</SPAN></SPAN><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN lang=EN-GB><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: <A
href="mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org"
target=_blank>internal-cg-bounces@icann.org</A> [mailto:<A
href="mailto:internal-cg-bounces@icann.org"
target=_blank>internal-cg-bounces@icann.org</A>] On Behalf Of Subrenat,
Jean-Jacques<BR>Sent: Monday, August 11, 2014 6:09 AM<BR>To: Kavouss
Arasteh<BR>Cc: Coordination Group<BR>Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus
building process<BR><BR>Hello Colleagues,<BR><BR>From the experience of the
past few weeks, unfortunately we can conclude that the current process is not
successful. Rather than meting out blame or praise, we need to understand why
it's not working. Group dynamics and a bit of sociology can help.<BR><BR>Our
Coordination Group is different from what some of us/you have come to consider
as "normal". The technical bodies (IETF, IAB) have developed an efficient
process where "rough consensus" is understood and accepted. But other
components of the ICG have different habits, and also a different
accountability mechanism: however attractive "rough" may be, it is
insufficient. For example, the GAC has its own rules (a joint position can
only be reached by unanimity), and the ALAC routinely conducts all its votes
on a full-membership basis (each member has to say ay, nay, abstain, or be
noted down as not having cast a vote).<BR><BR>So the challenge is this: is the
"rough consensus" really adapted to all the needs of our group? With the
experience gained collectively in London, and especially since then, I would
recommend a dual approach:<BR><BR>A/ MATTERS REQUIRING ALL MEMBERS TO VOTE
(typically, to be decided as soon as possible, with the exception of our
Transition plan)<BR> - Chair structure and
membership,<BR> - Charter of the ICG,<BR> - choice of
Secretariat (ICANN or outside of ICANN, or a mixture of both),<BR>
- choice of near-final drafts and approval of final draft of our Transition
plan, before presentation to the NTIA.<BR><BR>B/ MATTERS WHERE OTHER FORMS OF
DECISION-MAKING ARE ACCEPTABLE<BR> - Appraisal of specific
community input, as a contribution to the ICG's recommended plan (e.g. ALAC
should appraise input from its own community before submitting it to the whole
ICG),<BR> - external relations and communications of the ICG (once
the Chair structure has been chosen and populated, it may wish to ask Chair,
or another of its members, to be the point of contact),<BR> -
administrative & logistic matters, in conjunction with the chosen
Secretariat (here too, delegation would be possible).<BR><BR>I'm prepared to
provide a more detailed proposal for the above items.<BR><BR>Best
regards,<BR>Jean-Jacques.<BR><BR><BR><BR>----- Mail original -----<BR>De:
"Kavouss Arasteh" <<A href="mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com"
target=_blank>kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com</A>><BR>À: "Patrik Fältström"
<<A href="mailto:paf@frobbit.se"
target=_blank>paf@frobbit.se</A>><BR>Cc: "Coordination Group" <<A
href="mailto:internal-cg@icann.org"
target=_blank>internal-cg@icann.org</A>><BR>Envoyé: Lundi 11 Août 2014
10:40:08<BR>Objet: Re: [Internal-cg] Consensus building
process<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>Dear Wolf<BR>Thank you very much for reply<BR>My
point is that if one or more ICG Mmember(s) is7are againszt the ruling of the
Chir ,They could raise their issue and the matter must be settled by simple
explanation or if not resolved by voting . I.E. CHAIR DOES NOT HAVE DECISION
MAKING POWER ON HE OR HIS OWN WISHES RATHER TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT VIEWS OF
MEMBERS Regards KAVOUSS Regards<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>2014-08-11 8:33
GMT+02:00 Patrik Fältström < <A href="mailto:paf@frobbit.se"
target=_blank>paf@frobbit.se</A> > :<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>On 11 aug 2014, at
08:09, WUKnoben < <A href="mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de"
target=_blank>wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de</A> > wrote:<BR><BR>> The
chair’s designation that consensus is reached is not her/his own decision
rather than a wrap-up of extensive discussions. Of course this designation can
be challenged by members. And this is what triggers your question about “If
several participants in the ICG disagree with the designation given ...”. I’m
open to any helpful suggestion on how we could procede in such a case.<BR>>
In the end consensus - as defined – has to be achieved.<BR><BR>Let me
emphasize what you say here, which I strongly agree with.<BR><BR>We must
deliver.<BR><BR>This implies we must be able to reach consensus.<BR><BR>The
last couple of weeks discussions on various topics makes me a bit pessimistic
on the ability for us to reach consensus, but I am optimistic, always
optimistic, on peoples ability and interest in actually
deliver.<BR><BR>Remember that the chair is calling on the consensus question,
not the substance. That way the power of the chair is decreased to a minimum
and process
issues.<BR><BR>Patrik<BR><BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Internal-cg
mailing list<BR><A href="mailto:Internal-cg@icann.org"
target=_blank>Internal-cg@icann.org</A><BR><A
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg"
target=_blank>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg</A><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Internal-cg
mailing list<BR><A href="mailto:Internal-cg@icann.org"
target=_blank>Internal-cg@icann.org</A><BR><A
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg"
target=_blank>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg</A><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Internal-cg
mailing list<BR><A href="mailto:Internal-cg@icann.org"
target=_blank>Internal-cg@icann.org</A><BR><A
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg"
target=_blank>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg</A><U></U><U></U></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
lang=EN-GB><U></U><U></U></SPAN> </P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<DIV>_______________________________________________<BR>Internal-cg mailing
list<BR><A href="mailto:Internal-cg@icann.org"
target=_blank>Internal-cg@icann.org</A><BR><A
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg"
target=_blank>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg</A><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Internal-cg
mailing list<BR><A
href="mailto:Internal-cg@icann.org">Internal-cg@icann.org</A><BR><A
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg"
target=_blank>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg</A><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>