[CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: [bylaws-coord] DRAFT NEW ICANN BYLAWS - 2 April 2016 version

[Seun Ojedeji]

Maybe i have not been quite clear enough, I am supportive of the second
approach as well (Infact I'd suggest during the planning that the larger
group be provided update as the development of the document continues just
for the same purpose mentioned by Jordan).

However, the update that we receive from the team should always be that
which has been agreed to by both sides of the legal team (i.e the ICANN
legal and CCWG legal[1]) to be consistent with the proposal. Since that
does not seem to be the case with the document recently released, then I
think there should be some review time window provided between when the
legal team certifies a final draft document and publication for PC.

I will leave it at that and not try to further explain myself on this point
again (so as not to increase the thread unnecessarily).

Regards
1. What was agreed during the planning was that CCWG legal gets the first
shot at drafting, ICANN legal reviews and comments when necessary and it is
an update of that document(including any possible disagreement points) that
gets forwarded to the larger group.
Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 4 Apr 2016 00:15, "Jordan Carter" <jordan at internetnz.net.nz> wrote:

> Hi all
> I see a straightforward choice. Either we could wait to share the
> documents with the full group until that certification is available,
> leaving less review time, or we could run the processes in parallel - CCWG
> review/input and finalisation.
>
> I'm strongly supportive of the second approach. It gives all of us more
> time to digest the very large document, to understand it and to ensure our
> feedback is absorbed and taken into account.
>
> As always, in a perfect world, we could have waited and done these things
> one after another. And as always, the world is not perfect.
>
> Speak with you all soon!
>
> cheers
> Jordan
>
>
> On 4 April 2016 at 09:55, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello Milton,
>>
>> What they are asking is fine, but it should be that they confirm/believe
>> it's consistent with the recommendations (to the best of their knowledge).
>> The statement by the legal team did not confirm that. It instead implies
>> that such confirmation will come on the publication day which IMO is not
>> what has been done in the past.
>>
>> I am not underestimating the capacity of the "volunteer" CCWG but i am
>> not so certain we could review all these effectively, but if what is
>> provided to us is a document that has been agreed to by the DUO then there
>> is the likelihood that we may only be seeing some few inconsistencies and
>> way be missing just a few if any at all. While this current process can
>> continue (even though I would have preferred to avoid this back and forth),
>> I am of the opinion that it will be good to have a review period after
>> legal confirm draft before publishing for PC.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Sent from my LG G4
>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>> On 3 Apr 2016 22:35, "Mueller, Milton L" <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, Seun, maybe they are asking us for our opinion as to whether the
>>> draft meets the recommendations and if not, what needs to change. (Or am I
>>> too optimistic about the process?)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think it's all helpful to be reviewing a document that has not
>>> be agreed to by the DUO to accurately reflect the intent of the
>>> proposal(s). The idea is that if such action has happened prior to the
>>> CCWG/CWG looking at the draft then there will be less possibility of
>>> missing critical parts of the document.
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Jordan Carter
>
> Chief Executive
> *InternetNZ *
>
> +64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob) | Skype: jordancarter
> jordan at internetnz.net.nz | www.internetnz.nz
>
> *A better world through a better Internet*
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160404/17e2e771/attachment.html>