[CCWG-ACCT] Recommendation 6 and a way forward to include compromise text suggested by the Board

[Alan Greenberg]

Same issue I raised with Bruce.

I don't understand the concept of a Cross 
Community WG chartered by only one AC/SO.

Alan



At 04/02/2016 05:12 PM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía wrote:
>Dear all,
>
>After the thorough and fruitful discussions held 
>throughout the various plenary calls, we have 
>finalized Recommendation 6 yesterday. However 
>the Board also proposed a significant compromise 
>which seems to have gathered acceptance from 
>many in our CCWG community involved in the development of Recommendation 6.
>
>This seems to be the best approach to achieve a 
>compromise as it seems that it is something most 
>can live with and few really like.
>
>As such the co-chairs will recommend this 
>compromise by the Board be accepted by the CCWG 
>as its new consensus position on Recommendation 
>6 at the next meeting of the CCWG on Tuesday February 9 12:00UTC.
>
>To facilitate your consideration of this prior 
>to that meeting we are attaching two documents to this email:
>
>    * The first is a list of Recommendation 6 
> from the Third Draft, the current language 
> accepted for the supplemental report and the 
> Board compromise language. It also includes a 
> red line of the supplemental language vs the 
> Board compromise. Finally it analyses the 
> changes of the supplemental language vs the Board compromise.
>    * The second is a draft of Recommendation 6, 
> as finalized for the supplemental report, with 
> a red line of the changes needed to include the Board compromise.
>Thanking you in advance for your understanding 
>and spirit of compromise we look forward to any 
>comments you might have on the proposed way forward.
>
>Best regards,
>
>
>León, Thomas and Mathieu
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160205/bd86baf3/attachment-0001.html>