[CCWG-ACCT] A plea for time

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

Doesn't MEM create an entirely new, somewhat complicated, new appeals
mechanism that includes binding arbitration, something we still are not
sure works between a corporation and non-persons, like ACSOs.

I am currently trying to understand whether the various
AC/SO/SG/C/RALO/... would be well advised to become unincorporated
associations in order to be able to take advantage of the MEM and
subsequent court opportunities, if that solution is imposed.

avri



On 11-Oct-15 20:44, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
>
> For the record, I don't think MEM is perfect (and may never be) but
> it's more apealing to me considering that it's the only proposal that
> leaves structures untouched as much as possible (SD is also somewhat
> appealing as well, owning to the fact that some powers can't be
> directly exercised and require minimal structural change). May I know
> why you think the MEM for instance starts with arbitration and mediation?
>
> I am also in absolute agreement with a model built on cooperation and
> consensus, as I have usually raise that as a preference in some of my
> mails. However, I am also faced with the reality that when options
> gets exhausted a show of hand will usually come to be a last option to
> gauge consensus and I doubt we won't be exhausting our options often.
> That said, what is not clear is that you seem to imply that the SM
> model will achieve that better than any other model. As you rightly
> stated, isn't it finally about what is documented in the guideline
> (bylaw)?
>
> Regards
>
> Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
> Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>
> On 11 Oct 2015 20:38, "Avri Doria" <avri at acm.org
> <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On 11-Oct-15 15:22, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
>     > Not sure I get why you awarded accolades to SM in this instance,
>     Isn't
>     > collaboration(doing things cooperatively) based on set of guidelines
>     > possible in any model including SM?
>
>     Court is always there at the end of the day.  I just think that a
>     model
>     built on cooperation and consensus (a non voting SM) is less likely to
>     end up in court than a model that starts with adversarial behavior -
>     arbitration and mediation.
>
>     A well formed SM model builds on a combination, a hand-fasting, of the
>     Board's fiduciary roles and responsibilities with the Community's
>     roles
>     and responsibility to represent the interests of the public as
>     best they
>     can though the bylaws processes and outreach. They both check each
>     other
>     and both can be appealed to the IRP when they go off the rails.
>
>     avri
>
>     ---
>     This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>     https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>     Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>     <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus