[CCWG-ACCT] Review of Articles 1-10 of the Draft Bylaws

[Greg Shatan]

Kavouss,

If you are looking for a way to tie the changes in the Bylaws to the
sections of the draft proposal, an extensive document was circulated by
Holly several days ago which provides just such a concordance.  Read
together with the draft Bylaws, one can examine the Bylaws text in context
and verify the accuracy of the bylaws text compared with the proposal.

Greg



[image: http://hilweb1/images/signature.jpg]




*Gregory S. Shatan | Partner*McCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP

245 Park Avenue, 27th Floor | New York, New York 10167
T: 212-609-6873
F: 212-416-7613
gshatan @mccarter.com | www.mccarter.com

BOSTON | HARTFORD | STAMFORD | NEW YORK | NEWARK
EAST BRUNSWICK | PHILADELPHIA  | WILMINGTON | WASHINGTON, DC



On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 3:02 AM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear Greg
> Thank you very much for your kind
> Reply and  for the clarifications
> /explanations provided.
> My request was to have clear
> Description of these colour
> references.
> If legal team drafter confirm you
>  you described then it would be
> difficult to identify the source /
> origin of the text and its compliance
> With the supplemental proposal
> ,s text or its concept.
> In other words we have no means
> to verify the accuracy of the text
>  with concept or the text in the
> CCWG PROPOSAL
> Regards
> Kavousd
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 11 Apr 2016, at 00:49, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Kavouss,
>
> Please allow me to provide some insight, since I'm familiar with
> comparison ("redlining") software from my day job.
>
> Generically, red text is "new text."  In this case, it consists of the new
> Bylaws text drafted by the Bylaws drafting team, based on the Supplemental
> Proposal.  The "draft bylaws" in the Supplemental Proposal were never
> intended to be definitive text to be "cut and pasted" into the Bylaws.
> Rather, any such "draft bylaws" text was intended to be used along with
> descriptive and conceptual discussions of potential Bylaws text, "notes to
> drafters," and elements of the Supplemental Proposal that required Bylaws
> revisions in order to implement them (whether or not accompanied by "draft
> bylaws" text, etc.).
>
> Green text is "moved text." Generically, this consists of existing text
> that was moved by the drafters from a different place in the document. This
> can be useful when sections of a document are re-ordered.  Unfortunately,
> in my experience, these programs do a fairly poor job of picking up moved
> text. The redlining programs often pick up some new text that is the same
> as deleted text and deem that to be "moved text," which is of no use to the
> reader.  Conversely, the program will often fail to pick up moved text if
> it has been moved too far within a large document, and will show re-ordered
> sections as new text when they are not new.  In my personal preferences for
> comparison software, I "uncheck the box" for "show moved text," for the
> reasons set forth above.
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> <image001.jpg>
>
>
>
>
> *Gregory S. Shatan | Partner*McCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP
>
> 245 Park Avenue, 27th Floor | New York, New York 10167
> T: 212-609-6873
> F: 212-416-7613
> gshatan @mccarter.com | www.mccarter.com
>
> BOSTON | HARTFORD | STAMFORD | NEW YORK | NEWARK
> EAST BRUNSWICK | PHILADELPHIA  | WILMINGTON | WASHINGTON, DC
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <
> kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Lawyers,
>> Dear Co-Chairs,
>> I have studies the above  and wish to raise following questions
>> 1. In the redline texts I found many colours
>> *Black*
>> Blue
>> Red
>> Green
>> *Black *   I understand the Black colour is the initial texts of the
>> current Bylaws
>> Blue      I understand the Blue colour IS USED FOR RENUMBERING OF
>> aRTICLES
>> Red       I understand Red colour is used when new texts are added but
>> where these texts
>> Are they  come from the Supplemental Proposal ? My verification reveals
>> that not all texts coming from Supplemental Proposal as there are red texts
>> which have been added by the team. My question is how one could distinguish
>> those texts directly emanated from Supplemental Proposal from those added
>> by the team
>> Green   from where the green texts come from
>> I have also seen some new terms, words that were not discussed any where
>> Who has added these terms ?
>> I have not been able to highlight all these in a more distinctable way
>> but I have highlighted then with bigger font 18-20
>> Please kindly review that and reply to my questions
>> Regards
>> Kavouss
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20160411/ee3268f9/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6549 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160411/ee3268f9/image001-0001.jpg>