[CCWG-Accountability] Work Streams definition

[Mathieu Weill]

Dear Tijani,

The "new" proposal is in no way meant to be a substitute to the charter 
definition. The Charter definition, intentionally, left room for 
interpretation. Therefore the proposal we are now considering intends to 
provide the CCWG's interpretation and orientation.

Indeed, we are delivering on one of the areas of work mentioned in our 
Charter, which read (section III, deliverables) :
>
> ·A definition/description of what differentiates a Work Stream 1 issue 
> from a Work Stream 2 issue
>
Thus, the question is whether the proposed version is found appropriate 
to the group in order to qualify what is necessary before the transition 
happens.

I hope this clarifies.

Best
Mathieu

Le 15/01/2015 10:52, Tijani BEN JEMAA a écrit :
>
> Dear all,
>
> I read again the new proposed definition of the Work Streams, and I 
> found it too different from the one in our charter:
>
> In the charter:
>
> ·*Work Stream 1*: focused on mechanisms enhancing ICANN accountability 
> that must be in place or committed to within the time frame of the 
> IANA Stewardship Transition;
>
> ·*Work Stream 2*: focused on addressing accountability topics for 
> which a timeline for developing solutions and full implementation may 
> extend beyond the IANA Stewardship Transition
>
> The new proposal:
>
> ·*Work Stream 1*mechanisms are those that, when in place or committed 
> to, would provide the community with confidence that any 
> accountability  mechanism that would further enhance ICANN's 
> accountability would be implemented if it had consensus support from 
> the community, even if it were to encounter ICANN management 
> resistance or if it were against the interest of ICANN as a corporate 
> entity.
>
> ·All other consensus items could be in *Work Stream 2*, provided there 
> are mechanisms in WS1 adequate to force implementation of WS2 items 
> despite resistance from ICANN management and board.
>
> I don’t believe that we are allowed to change any part of the charter 
> without going back to the chartering organizations and ask for their 
> approval.
>
> On the other hand, the separation of WS 1 and WS 2 was for the purpose 
> of having the accountability mechanisms necessary before the 
> transition done in time, and the new definition doesn’t satisfy this 
> requirement
>
> I would prefer stay with the charter definition for all those reasons
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Tijani BEN JEMAA*
>
> Executive Director
>
> Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*)
>
> Phone:  + 216 41 649 605
>
> Mobile: + 216 98 330 114
>
> Fax: + 216 70 853 376
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> <http://www.avast.com/> 	
>
> Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel 
> malveillant parce que la protection Antivirus avast! 
> <http://www.avast.com/> est active.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

-- 
*****************************
Mathieu WEILL
AFNIC - directeur général
Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06
mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
Twitter : @mathieuweill
*****************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150115/8c83c352/attachment.html>