[CCWG-ACCT] Poll results

Greg Shatan gregshatanipc at gmail.com
Tue Feb 23 18:02:17 UTC 2016


All:

Here's my CORRECTED AND REVISED data and analysis (with a tip o' the hat to
Tatiana Tropina for pointing that my data for Poll #4 got mangled).  The
CORRECTED AND REVISED summary is as follows:

*REMOVING THE LANGUAGE (“If the IRP is not available to challenge the Board
action in question”)*

Poll #3 – Who supports removing the language in the 2nd bullet in Paragraph
72 (in red on the slide), (“If the IRP is not available to challenge the
Board action in question”)?
*10* (GAC, ccNSO, ALAC, NCSG, RySG, RrSG, BC, IPC, Board, Staff)

Poll #1 – Who objects to removing the 2nd bullet in Paragraph 72 (in red on
the slide), (“If the IRP is not available to challenge the Board action in
question”)?
*3* (ccNSO, NCSG, ISPCP)

*SENDING THE REPORT "AS IS"*

Poll #4 – Who supports sending the report to Chartering Organizations as it
is currently, (i.e. the 19 February version with the full text in Paragraph
72)?
*3* in support (ccNSO, NCSG, ISPCP)

Poll #2 – Who objects to sending the report forward (to Chartering
Organizations) as it is currently, (i.e. the 19 February version with the
full text in Paragraph 72)?
*6* (GAC, ccNSO, ALAC, RySG, Board, Staff)

Greg



On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Salaets, Ken <ksalaets at itic.org> wrote:

> Without an explicit commitment, it seems we cannot dismiss the possibility
> of yet another cycle like this latest one.  Perhaps the condition of
> agreeing to proposed edit?
>
>
>
> Ken
>
>
>
> *From:* accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Drazek,
> Keith
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 23, 2016 12:48 PM
> *To:* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>
> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Poll results
>
>
>
> Agreed.
>
>
>
> Keith
>
>
>
> *From:* accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [
> mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *James
> Gannon
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 23, 2016 12:45 PM
> *To:* Matthew Shears
> *Cc:* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Poll results
>
>
>
> I will also pile in on this in support of the request. This is important.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> On 23 Feb 2016, at 17:43, Matthew Shears <mshears at cdt.org> wrote:
>
> + 1 agree Steve
>
> On 2/23/2016 4:15 PM, Steve DelBianco wrote:
>
> I support Brett’s request for an explicit commitment.  Whether that
> commitment is given or not, Brett’s point should be noted as an ASSUMPTION
> of the CCWG in our report Annex 2.
>
>
>
> *From: *<accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of
> "Schaefer, Brett" <Brett.Schaefer at heritage.org>
> *Date: *Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 8:57 AMthis one in support,
> *To: *"el at lisse.NA" <el at lisse.NA>, "nigel at channelisles.net" <
> nigel at channelisles.net>, "accountability-cross-community at icann.org" <
> accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Poll results
>
>
>
> Chairs,
>
>
>
> As I mentioned in the call last night, before any final announcement is
> made, I would hope that we could get explicit clarification and commitment
> from the Board that, if the GAC cannot decide or chooses not to become a
> decisional participant, that the Board would support lowering the
> thresholds for exercising all EC powers to avoid the requirement for SOAC
> unanimous support to exercise those powers.
>
>
>
> I am concerned that the Board’s position on the GAC carve-out reference
> Board recall, could/would be equally applied to the above situation. I
> believe now, before a final decision is made, is the time to clarify that
> matter.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Brett
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *BrettSchaefer*
>
> * Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
> Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security
> and Foreign Policy*
> The Heritage Foundation
> 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
> Washington, DC 20002
> 202-608-6097
> heritage.org
>
> *From:* accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [
> mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dr
> Eberhard W Lisse
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 23, 2016 8:41 AM
> *To:* nigel at channelisles.net; accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Poll results
>
>
>
> Without even bothering to register as Participant.
>
> el
>
> On 2016-02-23 15:36, Nigel Roberts wrote:
> > I'm also puzzled as to how Board Members, and the CEO, can simply pitch
> > up and pitch in, late in the game.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 23/02/16 13:27, Edward Morris wrote:
> >> Disagree.
> >> There are formal requirements for participating in the CCWG.
> >
> > There are indeed
> >
> >
> >> It's a minimal requirement, but a necessary one
> > The fact that the requirement is minimal is no excuse for dispensing
> > with it extrajudicially. In fact, it's no excuse at all, since if it is
> > minimal, anyone who wanted to be Participant has a very low hurdle.
> >
> > No gerrymandering, please.
> [...]
>
>
> --
> Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist (Saar)
> el at lisse.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
> PO Box 8421 \ /
> Bachbrecht, Namibia ;____/
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Matthew Shears | Director, Global Internet Policy & Human Rights Project
>
> Center for Democracy & Technology | cdt.org
>
> E: mshears at cdt.org | T: +44.771.247.2987
>
>
>
> CDT's Annual Dinner, Tech Prom, is April 6, 2016. Don't miss out - register at cdt.org/annual-dinner.
>
>
>
> This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160223/0ba0c5f9/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Detailed results of 23 Feb Poll - Distribution Analysis.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 369496 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160223/0ba0c5f9/Detailedresultsof23FebPoll-DistributionAnalysis-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Detailed results of 23 Feb Poll - Distribution Analysis.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 40402 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160223/0ba0c5f9/Detailedresultsof23FebPoll-DistributionAnalysis-0001.docx>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list