[CCWG-ACCT] Recommendation 6 and a way forward to include compromise text suggested by the Board
alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Fri Feb 5 06:23:52 UTC 2016
Same issue I raised with Bruce.
I don't understand the concept of a Cross
Community WG chartered by only one AC/SO.
At 04/02/2016 05:12 PM, LeÃ³n Felipe SÃ¡nchez AmbÃa wrote:
>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.
>LeÃ³n, Thomas and Mathieu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community