[CCWG-ACCT] Recommendation 11, 2/3 board threshold, GAC consensus, and finishing
kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Tue Feb 2 15:25:41 UTC 2016
Please read my two previous messages
Sent from my iPhone
> On 2 Feb 2016, at 15:55, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el at lisse.NA> wrote:
> I disagree, we can most certainly and most easily take both, they are
> not exclusive, in fact the complement each other.
>> On 2016-02-02 16:47, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
>> Dear Andrew
>> Dear All,
>> I have just asked Becky to slightly modify her text by referring to"
>> Board's Actions inregard with GAC aDVICE " and not ' GAC Advice" due to
>> the fact that IRP could be invoked against Board's action and not an AC
>> or a SO .
>> She kindly confirmed that
>> Second the alternative of 60% is MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE with Her Proposal
>> after editorial amendments mentioned above.
>> We CAN NOT TAKE BOTH OF THEM AS TWO MUTUALLY INCLUSIVE OPTIONS
>> 2016-02-02 15:32 GMT+01:00 Paul Rosenzweig
>> <paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
>> <mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com>>:
>> I agree with Andrew. Logically, there is no reason they are mutually
>> exclusive. Politically, they are quite interdependent. For some the
>> willingness to accept 60% might very well be contingent on Becky's
>> being adopted.
>> Paul Rosenzweig
> Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar)
> el at lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
> PO Box 8421 \ /
> Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community