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

Tijani BEN JEMAA tijani.benjemaa at fmai.org.tn
Sat Feb 6 17:20:39 UTC 2016

If there is a reason for breaking the CCWG charter and taking some parts of WS 2 tasks out of the CCWG-accountability, I would like to know it.
Executive Director
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)
Phone: +216 98 330 114
            +216 52 385 114

> Le 5 févr. 2016 à 17:38, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> a écrit :
> 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).
> Alan
> 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.
>> Regards,
>> Bruce Tonkin
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160206/b9bec738/attachment.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list