[CCWG-ACCT] the power to enforce AOC type (6.7) recommendations

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

> Does that help?

Apologies, but I think I remain confused. 

I understand that we still have the ultimate accountability function.
Still don't know if there is any other power.

First, as far as I remember, we did not get the Power to force a
decision against complete inaction.

Also I do not believe that it would be the case that there was complete
inaction.  I am sure that the Board would review the various
recommendations of the AOC type review teams.  Most reviews contain many
recommendations, and the Board could accept some and reject others.

> because once the board has made a decision, we are putting in
> accountability mechanisms to question that decision

Do you mean reconsideration and IRP? 

thanks
avri

On 26-Apr-15 14:03, Jonathan Zuck wrote:
>
> Avri,
>
> I completely agree that this is new obligation and that it must find
> its way into the bylaws.
>
>  
>
> As for your other question, I think it’s not a question of giving
> power to a review team but rather to the community to induce the board
> to accept recommendations from a review team.
>
>  
>
> To accomplish that, all we need to do an ensure that the board
> actually considers the recommendations and makes a decision about
> them, any decision because once the board has made a decision, we are
> putting in accountability mechanisms to question that decision. The
> whole that currently exist is in cases of complete /inaction/ on the
> part of the board.
>
>  
>
> The best analogy I think can of at the moment is the FTC.  The FTC has
> the ability to hold companies to their promises. Getting companies to
> post privacy policies is the equivalent of getting them to promise
> something at which point, they are then subject to FTC review.
>
>  
>
> Does that help?
>
> Jonathan
>
>  
>
>  
>
> *From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Avri Doria
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 26, 2015 1:29 PM
> *To:* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> *Subject:* [CCWG-ACCT] the pwoer to enforce AOC type (6.7) recommendations
>
>  
>
> Hi,
>
> In the draft recommendations (6.7.2):
>
>
>     Require the ICANN board to approve and implement review team
>     recommendations, including
>     recommendations from previous reviews.
>
>
>
>     The final output of all reviews will be published for public comment.
>     The Board shall consider approval and begin implementation within
>     six months of receipt of the recommendations.
>
>
> We discussed this as a putting a greater obligation onf the Board than
> it currently has.  But I do not understand how that is the case.  At
> this point, it is still up to the Board to agree or not. 
>
> In responding to a CWG-IANA based question from an NCSG member on how
> the IANA Function Review recommendation  for a RFP, if such were to
> ever happen, would be respected by the ICANN Board?  Couldn't they
> just ignore it.
>
> I did not have a response and am wondering what part of the community
> powers I am forgetting.
>
> This points to the more general question about any recommendation of
> an AOC type review.
>
> Other than the no-confidence removal of the Board (6.6.6. got to love
> the numer!), is there anything that gives the AOC-Like review
> recommendations the sort of Community powers that we have discussed
> having for budgets, strategy & operational plans (6.6.2) ?  Is it
> possible to include Board rejection of AOC type review recommendations
> under the category of decision that can be overruled by members?  Or
> is that class of decsion restricted by statute?
>
> Thanks
>
> avri
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Image removed by sender. Avast logo <http://www.avast.com/>
>
> 	
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com/>
>
>  
>



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150426/a7421d7b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 823 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150426/a7421d7b/attachment.jpe>