[CCWG-ACCT] Removal and accountability to community (was Re: CCWG ACCT Proposed Agenda - Call #84 - Tuesday, 16 February @ 06:00 UTC)

Andrew Sullivan ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
Thu Feb 18 15:01:13 UTC 2016

cc:s trimmed; I think everyone's on the list.

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 08:17:00AM +0100, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
> Removal of the Board is a crucial and delicate issue.

This is true, but the board has already argued convincingly that this
is a corner case.  If it's really a corner case, then making a perfect
process for it seems like investing more effort than warranted.  And
as I argued yesterday (though I know you said you don't accept the
argument), we are going to have to accept that, if things ever get so
bad that people are willing to remove the board despite being
unwilling to claim they violated the bylaws, we'll be well into a very
bad political landscape.  More rules are unlikely to help.

> Otherwise the process would once again is unfavourably treated the GAC due
> to its exclusion from exercising its community power as results of the
> Carve-out Concept

We've been over that ground: the GAC gets to choose whether it's in
the community power or whether it's going to use its special GAC-only
power.  Nobody else has the power to force the GAC's choice.  Yes, the
GAC is treated differently under one of those branches, but that is a
consequence of GAC's own decisions -- a choice that the GAC makes
knowing what its later options are.

I really do not care very much how this gets sorted out, but I think
it is time to stop debating it.  We should unite around the report as
it stands and ship it.

Best regards,


Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list