[CCWG-ACCT] Recommendation 6 and a way forward to include compromise text suggested by the Board
gregshatanipc at gmail.com
Fri Feb 5 18:12:43 UTC 2016
Agree with Alan 100%. Any group by which the community develops the HR
framework and purports to provide the Board with community (in the broad
sense) produced recommendations, advice or guidance needs to be chartered
by multiple SOs and ACs to have the appropriate breadth, gravitas and
legitimacy for this important, nuanced and challenging task.
The alternative is to continue the charter of the CCWG, but that does not
seem to be the view of Board and senior staff....
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
> I think that we want a chartering process comparable to that of the CCWG.
> I presume that if a HR group were to come into existence and was not
> chartered by a reasonable number of orgs, then the Board would not agree to
> the "semi-binding" nature of the outcomes (forgive me inventing a new word
> to describe the CCWG-Board process previously agreed to).
> At 05/02/2016 01:52 AM, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
>> Hello Alan,
>> >> I don't understand the concept of a Cross Community WG chartered by
>> only one AC/SO.
>> Good pick up. Might be best described as "two or more", or "at least
>> three" if you want a minimum threshold.
>> Bruce Tonkin
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community