[Ws2-jurisdiction] Fwd: [CCWG-ACCT] Caption Notes-Recordings-Transcript links for Jurisdiction Meeting #35 - 14 June 2017

[Seun Ojedeji]

Hello Greg,

Thanks for your clarification so based on your explanation:

1. The co-chairs of the CCWG presented a personal decision of theirs and
not of the plenary? I had thought co-chairs are supposed to observe
discussion within the CCWG plenary and make their decision based on that.

2. The subgroup then supported​ the decision of the co-chairs (hopefully by
consensus?). May I know if the subgroup decision making is only limited to
those who attend meeting calls? I think it's important to consider the
significance of the comments raised by the few members you indicated
opposed as you and I know that just checking numbers for/against in this
case will not do necessary justice to the matter at hand.

3. Saying that this will now be decided by the plenary after the co-chairs
of the plenary already made a declaration/decision about the subject matter
sounds like a procedural flaw to me.

The plenary co-chairs have done extremely well in coordinating the CCWG
since WS1 and I hope this will not be an exception. I will apply same
comment to subgroup leads as well.

Regards
PS: my participation here remains as an end user affiliated to atlarge and
NOT as any other hat that I may wear.

On 16 Jun 2017 12:50 AM, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:

> Seun,
>
> Thank you for asking.  Let me clarify for you and others where we are
> procedurally. Yes, issues relating to clarity on scope are ultimately to be
> determined by the CCWG plenary. As you note, Thomas was speaking for the
> co-Chairs, and as the co-chairs stated, after almost a year of
> deliberations in this group, they could not see the possibility of
> consensus on recommendations which included these elements.   The decision
> presented by Thomas was a decision by the co-Chairs. It was good that bulk
> of the Subgroup supported the decision on the call, but it should not be
> viewed as a Subgroup action per se.  As of the end of the call, the
> discussion and decision now goes to the Plenary. Unless the decision
> changes there, that ends the discussion within the CCWG.
>
> Greg
>
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello Greg,
>>
>> In the summary sent by staff the decision extract starts with the
>> following:
>>
>> "Thomas Rickert for the CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs, We have concluded
>> that......."
>>
>> Please can you clarify if this decision was made by the subgroup or by
>> the CCWG plenary as well? As I am somewhat unclear who is declaring/making
>> decisions on things here.
>>
>> If am right, the subgroup makes recommendations to the plenary who then
>> decides, it also seem to me that issues relating to clarity on scope should
>> be better determined by the CCWG plenary.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> On 15 Jun 2017 10:27 PM, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Jurisdiction Subgroup Members,
>>>
>>> As noted below, after two full meetings devoted to the topic, the
>>> Subgroup arrived at a decision (excerpted verbatim from the transcript in
>>> the email below).  For convenience, here it is again:
>>>
>>> We have concluded that the Jurisdiction sub-group will take California
>>> jurisdiction as a base line for all its recommendations, and that the
>>> sub-team not pursue recommendations to change ICANN's jurisdiction of
>>> incorporation, location of headquarters or seek immunity for ICANN.  With
>>> this decision we are recognizing that there is no possibility that there
>>> would be consensus for an immunity based concept or a change of place of
>>> incorporation.  As such I would establish in the minutes of this call that
>>> we focus on the solution that gets most traction.  Recognizing that this
>>> does not eliminate, as I think Avri said during last week's call, that we
>>> can discuss all issues that might arise during the deliberations.  But that
>>> we actually focus on the status quo being California law and place of
>>> incorporation. and work on solutions that are founded on this.
>>>
>>>
>>> Opposition was noted from four participants on the call (including one
>>> who left before the end, but had made his position clear.
>>>
>>> This decision will now be referred to the Plenary, consistent with CCWG
>>> procedures.
>>>
>>> With this, I believe that it is imperative that we return to and focus
>>> on identifying potential issues, deciding whether these are in fact issues
>>> within our remit, discussing those issues and making recommendations for
>>> resolving those issues.
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: MSSI Secretariat <mssi-secretariat at icann.org>
>>> Date: Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 1:46 PM
>>> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Caption Notes-Recordings-Transcript links for
>>> Jurisdiction Meeting #35 - 14 June 2017
>>> To: CCWG Accountability <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>>> Cc: "ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org" <ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The caption notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability
>>> WS2 Jurisdiction Subgroup Meeting #35– 14 June 2017 will be available
>>> here:   https://community.icann.org/x/GSDwAw
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A copy of the action items and raw caption notes may be found below.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> With kind regards,
>>>
>>> *Brenda Brewer,** Projects & Operations Assistant *
>>>
>>> Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI)
>>>
>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>>>
>>> Skype:  brenda.brewer.icann
>>>
>>> Phone:  1-310-745-1107 <(310)%20745-1107>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Raw Captioning Notes*
>>>
>>> *Please note that these are the unofficial transcript. Official
>>> transcript will be posted 2-3 days after the call*
>>>
>>>    - Word Doc
>>>    <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66068505/Jurisdicton_0614ICANN1300UTC.RTF?version=1&modificationDate=1497462625000&api=v2>
>>>    - PDF
>>>    <https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66068505/Jurisdiction_0614ICANN1300UTC.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1497462637000&api=v2>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Decisions:*
>>>
>>>    - Thomas Rickert for the CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs, We have
>>>    concluded that the Jurisdiction sub-group will take Californian
>>>    jurisdiction as a base line for all its recommendations, and that the
>>>    sub-team not pursue recommendations to change ICANN's jurisdiction of
>>>    incorporation, location of headquarters or seek immunity for ICANN.  With
>>>    this decision we are recognizing that there is no possibility that there
>>>    would be consensus for an immunity based concept or a change of place of
>>>    incorporation.  As such I would establish in the minutes of this call that
>>>    we focus on the solution that gets most traction.  Recognizing that this
>>>    does not eliminate, as I think Avri said during last week's call, that we
>>>    can discuss all issues that might arise during the deliberations.  But that
>>>    we actually focus on the status quo being Californian law and place of
>>>    incorporation. and work on solutions that are founded on this.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Action Items:*
>>>
>>>    - (none)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Requests:*
>>>
>>>    - (none)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
>>> Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction
>>>
>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20170616/3bedc1de/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 5172 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-jurisdiction/attachments/20170616/3bedc1de/image001-0001.png>