[CCWG-ACCT] Carve-out issue

James Gannon james at cyberinvasion.net
Fri Feb 19 18:21:28 UTC 2016

Unless the GAC can present us with a consensus objection or some form of wholesome proposal reflecting the full breath of membership of the GAC I think we need to move forward noting the objections of the 11 GAC members.

The board is free to vote against our proposal. Do not let this 11th hour rush to push the CCWG into a corner move us from our long and hopefully fruitful journey.


From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com>>
Date: Friday 19 February 2016 at 6:15 p.m.
To: 'Phil Corwin' <psc at vlaw-dc.com<mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com>>, 'Greg Shatan' <gregshatanipc at gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>, 'Kavouss Arasteh' <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>>
Cc: 'Thomas Rickert' <thomas at rickert.net<mailto:thomas at rickert.net>>, "accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>" <accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Carve-out issue


Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweigesq at redbranchconsulting.com>
O: +1 (202) 547-0660
M: +1 (202) 329-9650
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066
Link to my PGP Key<http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=9>
[cid:image001.png at 01D16B17.90D93970]<http://www.rsaconference.com/events/us16?utm_source=signature&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=speakers-us2016>

From: Phil Corwin [mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com]
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 12:52 PM
To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>>; Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>>
Cc: Thomas Rickert <thomas at rickert.net<mailto:thomas at rickert.net>>; accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Carve-out issue


Assuming that the new Board position is indeed a response to a minority position of a few GAC members, I am in full agreement that it “should serve as a warning to us all”.

Indeed, it emphasizes exactly why the GAC should not be able to block the community’s ability to hold the Board accountable for implementing GAC consensus advice that the community feels is outside the scope of the Bylaws or Mission Statement.

Best. Philip

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

From:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 12:38 PM
To: Kavouss Arasteh
Cc: accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>; Thomas Rickert
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Carve-out issue

It is alarming that a few GAC members could seek to undo a carefully balanced compromise.  And even more alarming that those few GAC members could so quickly trigger a Board intervention.

The carve-out is balanced against the concerns of other stakeholders with regard to (i) the proposed supermajority threshold for Board rejection of GAC advice and (ii) the GAC's overall role as a decisional participant in the Empowered Community, rather than its traditional advisory capacity.  The carve-out itself underwent a compromise, requiring the Community to go through an IRP before exercising the power of Board recall.

When one pulls on one end of a compromise, the other end tends to move as well.

Do other stakeholders need to send countervailing warnings?  Will the Board respond as quickly? Do we want to find out?

I think this extraordinary response to a minority report should serve as a warning to us all.


On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>> wrote:
Please kindly confirm and acknowledge recipt of wanrning message

2016-02-19 18:10 GMT+01:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>>:
Dear Co-chairs
You have seen the concerns of 11 Governments which would certainly be echoed by other gouvernements soon.
If there is no consensus means there is no consensus ,
We could not favour one community in disfavouring another one.
Perhaps it was hoped that the people could join the consensus but it does not come up as such
If a mistake has occurred we should repair it .
Howmany times we have changed our concept from Voluntry Model to Sole member from Sole Member to Sole designator .
Pls do not rush to publish the report as being sent to the chartering organization just hold on for few more days untill your 26 feb. calls
Try to find out some solution including going back to the initial stage of REC. 11 without no carve-out and with two options of simple majority and 2/3 theshold  and rediscuss that.
You can not ignor the growing concerns of several governments and would certainly be further grown up soon

Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7303 / Virus Database: 4530/11623 - Release Date: 02/14/16
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160219/47f0ef77/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2849 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160219/47f0ef77/image001-0001.png>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list