[CCWG-ACCT] Mission Statement
FinPet at erst.dk
Mon Jan 11 09:42:16 UTC 2016
Seun: You are right – I forgot ”NOT”:
So it should have been:
With all respect – you are NOT answering the question! Sorry if I had not formulated the question properly.
Fra: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com]
Sendt: 10. januar 2016 21:57
Til: Finn Petersen
Emne: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Mission Statement
I guess you meant NOT answering the question.
On 10 Jan 2016 9:52 PM, "Finn Petersen" <FinPet at erst.dk<mailto:FinPet at erst.dk>> wrote:
With all respect – you are answering the question! Sorry if I had not formulated the question properly.
So let me try again.
Is there, in your view, any kind of GAC advice that today (with the current Mission Statement) is within ICANN’s mission, but that in the future with the revised Mission Statement as defined in the CCWG 3rd draft report would be outside the revised mission for ICANN, so that the Board does not have the possibility any longer to take the advice into account?
I hope the question is clearer now. There are only two possible answers: yes or no!
Fra: Mueller, Milton L [mailto:milton at gatech.edu<mailto:milton at gatech.edu>]
Sendt: 8. januar 2016 23:18
Til: Finn Petersen; accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
Emne: RE: Mission Statement
From our latest exchanges regarding the new Mission Statement and as stated in the chat yesterday, DK is of the view that the Board can of course only take decisions based on GAC advice that is within the ICANN’s mission.
MM: Thank you for that.
But what we have been seeking is a clear answer to see if the proposed changes to the Mission Statement would imply that the Board in the future would be further constrained in taking GAC advice into account.
MM: Well, it depends on the advice, doesn’t it?
I understood from Becky during our CCWG call yesterday, “that ICANN should be able to continue to accept and implement GAC advice as it has been”– in other words the Board will have the same possibility to take into account GAC advice in the future (after the IANA transition) as the Board has today. If that is the case, I would think that it is now crystal clear to me.
MM: As above, if GAC advises ICANN to do things that are outside its mission you can expect challenges.
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community