[CCWG-ACCT] CCWG - Draft Update document for CCWG call

Sat Nov 14 19:27:45 UTC 2015

But size isn't everything. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On 13 Nov 2015, at 19:36, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I didn't realize you were such a big Justin Bieber fan.  My apologies, then.
> 
>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well you started the scenario painting in the first place so I had the share of your insult as well. If the same person raise petition through multiple SO/AC and survives the internal processes of those SO/AC to remove their respective individual members then such person deserves the next Ethos award.
>> 
>> If you think the SO/AC community could be so drunk/distracted by approving/supporting such petition then maybe it's another reason why allowing appointing SO/AC remove her board member is flawed.
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>> 
>> On 13 Nov 2015 19:53, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Perhaps you want the role to be restricted to leaders of SO/AC so Greg as the president of IPC can be the only one within IPC to raise such petition. Sorry that won't be implementing the concept of MS and I thought you do value that.
>>> 
>>> I did not in any way express or imply such an absurd thing, and I'm rather insulted that you would even raise the possibility.  Perhaps you will find a way to join the few SO/ACs you haven't yet joined, so that you can raise a petition wherever you feel like it, even if the right is restricted.   That seems like a much better plan for world domination, with much less work, than chairing a constituency.
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Since you have the understanding below then that is correct and there is noting wrong with that; The petition only becomes recognised as legitimate when the SO/AC owns it.
>>>> 
>>>> I don't see what the issue is in that scenario, an individual (or group of people) raise a need, it goes through the particular SO/AC consideration processes and becomes a formal petition of the concerned SO/AC.
>>>> 
>>>> Perhaps you want the role to be restricted to leaders of SO/AC so Greg as the president of IPC can be the only one within IPC to raise such petition. Sorry that won't be implementing the concept of MS and I thought you do value that.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards
>>>> Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
>>>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>>>> 
>>>>> On 13 Nov 2015 19:25, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I don't believe Page 18 addresses my concerns.  It says:
>>>>> 
>>>>> The petition can only be started in the SO or AC that nominated the Director.
>>>>> 
>>>>> It does not limit who can start that petition.  As such, Justin Bieber could start a petition (or Seun Ojedeji -- oops I see you are are member of NCSG (along with ALAC and the ASO) so you could start a petition almost anywhere regardless of restrictions) in the GNSO to remove Bruce Tonkin (a GNSO-appointed Director).  So, my concern stands.....
>>>>> 
>>>>> If there's something I'm missing on page 18, please let me know.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Greg
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
>>>>>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>>>>>> On 13 Nov 2015 18:08, "Greg Shatan" <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > A few quick comments, since that's all there's time for under this plan.  I was only able to review my prior comments against this draft; no time for a full read.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > 1. Page 11: Petition Process: Is it clear that any individual, regardless of affiliation can begin a petition in any AC/SO for every power? Even removing that AC/SO's appointed director? For example, can Justin Bieber start a petition in the GNSO to remove Bruce Tonkin?  If that is what we agreed to, never mind.  It just strikes me as odd, and I haven't seen it expressed this way before. (I think we used the passive voice before, which did not identify the "actor" or any limitation on their identity or affiliation.)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> SO: Page 18 addresses your fears.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> > 
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr> wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Dear Sabine,
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> I think that this is version issue. The version of the document you are referencing is the incorrect one.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Indeed, it was part of the transparency issues mentioned in Dublin and, during the CCWG call #65 we specifically discussed the item (see the slides here : https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/56144581/WP2%20Issues%202%20Nov%202015.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1446529282000&api=v2) and acknowledged that there we had received several requests to address this issue in WS2.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Thank you for raising this consistency issue.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Best,
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Mathieu
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> De : accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] De la part de Sabine.Meyer at bmwi.bund.de
>>>>>> >> Envoyé : vendredi 13 novembre 2015 15:01
>>>>>> >> À : turcotte.bernard at gmail.com
>>>>>> >> Cc : accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>>>>> >> Objet : Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG - Draft Update document for CCWG call
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Dear Bernard,
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> thank you for updating and re-sending the draft!
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> To my understanding, the list of WS2 items on p 29 does not yet reflect the current status of discussions if indeed the latest version is the following: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/50823981/AJed%2020151026%20Items%20for%20Consideration%20in%20Work%20Stream%202.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1446576372000&api=v2
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> In that case, “ICANN’s interaction with governments” is currently not part of the draft.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Thank you for considering this.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Kind regards
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Sabine Meyer
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> International Digital and Postal Policy, Internet Governance
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Villemombler Strasse 76, 53123 Bonn
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> GERMANY
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Phone: +49 228 99615-2948
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Fax: + 49 228 99615-2964
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> E-Mail: sabine.meyer at bmwi.bund.de
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Internet: http://www.bmwi.de
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] Im Auftrag von Bernard Turcotte
>>>>>> >> Gesendet: Freitag, 13. November 2015 00:04
>>>>>> >> An: Accountability Cross Community
>>>>>> >> Betreff: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG - Draft Update document for CCWG call
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> All,
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> As per Mathieu's email of earlier today please find the draft Proposal Update document which will be discussed at the next CCWG meeting.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> The document is going to professional formatting as we speak - so any issues of layout, fonts etc. will be addressed by a specialist.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> This document also represents a consideration of all the comments received with respect to the previous version - not that all of these were accepted, but a majority were taken on.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> We apologize for the lateness of the document, but as you will notice we have put significant efforts into recasting this per the comments.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Bernard Turcotte
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> ICANN Staff Support for the CCWG
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>  
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> for the CCWG Co-chairs.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>>> >> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>>>> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>>>>> > Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>>>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>>>> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151114/1f878b88/attachment.html>