[WP1] First comments

[Greg Shatan]

Two of Alan's comments imply that there is a distinction between the "Sole
Designator" and the "Empowered Community":

Page 14, step 5, bullet 1. For removal of directors, it is the sole
> designator the uses its powers. For the other powers, shouldn't it be the
> Empowered Community?
> Page 16 and elsewhere, Articles of Incorporation changes also need
> approval of the Empowered Community (not just the Designators as could be
> implied from Steve's suggestion).


Maybe I'm losing track here, but I thought the "Empowered Community" was
the same thing as the "Sole Designator" -- just a more user-friendly name
(or "brand").  I admit I haven't read the Third Draft yet, so maybe I'm
missing something....  Am I missing something?

Greg

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
wrote:

> I have a conflict with today's meeting, but here are a few comments. I
> will have more for the meeting on Monday.
>
> Page 10, delineation of the Empowered Community. I think we need to
> mention here why the other two ACs are not listed (their own choice
> combined with the fact that they are technically appointed by the Board).
> Also, do we not need to say that the SSAC and RSSAC are members of the
> Empowered Community in their advisory role?
>
> Page 10, item 1 at the bottom. The wording in the footnote below is more
> appropriate. "The entity will act as the sole designator, which has ....".
> Saying it takes the form of the sole designator obfuscated the fact that it
> will also act on behalf of all 5 (or whatever) AC/SOs that weld power.
>
> Page 14, if it is envisioned that the Community Forum would EVER be F2F,
> 15 days is not sufficient. If we keep 15 days, we need to make sure we are
> nowhere referring to it as F2F.
>
> Page 14, step 5, bullet 1. For removal of directors, it is the sole
> designator the uses its powers. For the other powers, shouldn't it be the
> Empowered Community?
>
> Page 16 and elsewhere, Articles of Incorporation changes also need
> approval of the Empowered Community (not just the Designators as could be
> implied from Steve's suggestion).
>
> Page 25, procedures to ENSURE that the Interim Board will not be in ploace
> for more than 120 days. ENSURE is too strong a word. "with a target of
> ensuring" would be fine.
>
> Alan
>
> _______________________________________________
> WP1 mailing list
> WP1 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp1/attachments/20151122/a230e736/attachment.html>