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

[Barrack Otieno]

Seun raises valid points which should be considered, that said i am
also in agreement with Jordan's sentiments.

Regards

On 4/4/16, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
>>
>>
>


-- 
Barrack O. Otieno
+254721325277
+254733206359
Skype: barrack.otieno