[CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Recommendation 2 – Escalation timeframe (first reading)

Jordan Carter jordan at internetnz.net.nz
Wed Jan 6 17:06:40 UTC 2016

Hi all

Just a couple of general comments.

On the timeframe concern, I think we face a hard juggle to keep the times
reasonably tight on the one hand (so things don't drag where a power should
be used), and making sure the powers are actually workable.

If we have to lengthen the times for any steps I think we should look for
ways to not see the total timeframe to use a power blow out.

My primary proposal to achieve that is to merge the petitioning and
conference call steps. I wasn't able to be part of the discussion about the
escalation process in Dublin because I was detained on other small groups,
but I never supported adding another step to our quite clean "Petition,
Forum, Decision" model from the second draft.

So if we were to go ahead in this way, an SO or AC would decide to petition
to use the power. If that petition was successful, according to its own
rules, a Community Forum would be organised.

I think we are clearer than we were at one point that the Community Forum
isn't a chance for travelling and getting together in person: it's an
online Adobe meeting, which is highly unlikely ever to take one day or two.

In other words, having both a Conference Call and a Community Forum
essentially duplicates the same thing, with no benefit that is entirely

Merging the two steps will help avoid a time frame blowout.

I can't recall whether or not we had said more than one SO or AC needed to
petition to use a power but we could use the same threshold as required to
hold a Forum, in merging the steps.

On changing the #s to %s in the decision table, I don't know how workable
this is - it risks unintentionally creating too-high thresholds or too-low
ones, given the low number of SOs and ACs involved. I think I would prefer
to stick with numbers, and adjusting them should the numbers of SOs or ACs
change in future, but don't have a strong view about that.

Hope this helps.


On 6 January 2016 at 15:55, Alice Jansen <alice.jansen at icann.org> wrote:

> *Sent on behalf of CCWG-ACCT Co-Chairs*
> In preparation for your R*ecommendation 2 – Escalation timeframe (first
> reading)* discussion scheduled for your call #75 - Thursday, 7 January
> 2016 (19:00 – 22:00 UTC) - please find attached the material to review.
> Please use this email thread to circulate any comments you may have in
> advance of the call.
> Thank you
> Mathieu, Thomas, León
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

Jordan Carter

Chief Executive

+64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)
Email: jordan at internetnz.net.nz
Skype: jordancarter
Web: www.internetnz.nz

*A better world through a better Internet *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160106/da7be959/attachment.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list