[CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)

[Nigel Roberts]

Folks

I disagree.

Unless there are objective standards set for such removal, then the 
requirement of a provision of a rationale opens up the Corporation for 
unlimited litigation based on whether the rationale provided was a good 
reason for removal.

The ONLY objective rationale for removal is that "X% of those entitled 
to vote in the matter have voted for removal".

You will not, obviously, achieve X% unless a convincing reason is put.

But a convincing reason can, quite reasonably be that "we (the SO, for 
example) do not like his/her performance on the Board"

The requirement for justifying a petition is just a way to make it 
harder for those seeking to exercise the power.



On 01/18/2016 08:46 AM, Chartier, Mike S wrote:
> Sure.
>
> For instance with regard to removal of individual Board members, our
> third proposal required a rationale to be provided before the Community
> conference. In our call #74 it was proposed to include a rationale even
> earlier in the process at the petition phase.
>
> It seems to be a good idea that when there is some action proposed, that
> a reason is given for why the action is needed.
>
> *From:*Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, January 18, 2016 3:16 AM
> *To:* Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>
> *Cc:* Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>; Chartier, Mike S
> <mike.s.chartier at intel.com>; accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)
>
> Dear All,
>
> Thank you for your message and reminders,
>
> May I ask you to kindly give atleast few example of any of those "
> Rationale"
>
> Tks
>
> Kavouss
>
> 2016-01-18 9:10 GMT+01:00 Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
> <mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>>:
>
>     Mike,
>
>     Good catch indeed. Precisely the point of our first reading exercise.
>
>     So we will add this to recommendation 11 agenda item tomorrow.
>
>     I will note that the current annex includes a related recommendation :
>
>     ·Insert a mention for all ACs: “The AC will make every effort to
>     ensure that the advice provided is clear and supported by a rationale.”
>
>     Best,
>
>     Mathieu
>
>     *De :*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>     <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>
>     [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>     <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] *De la
>     part de* Greg Shatan
>     *Envoyé :* lundi 18 janvier 2016 05:30
>     *À :* Chartier, Mike S
>     *Cc :* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>     <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>     *Objet :* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)
>
>     Mike,
>
>     Good point and good catch.  This should not have been overlooked.
>
>     Greg
>
>     On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Chartier, Mike S
>     <mike.s.chartier at intel.com <mailto:mike.s.chartier at intel.com>> wrote:
>
>     I think this is another illustration of how we need to be careful in
>     documenting the process for handling comments (other than the
>     Boards). For Recommendation 11 several commenters offered the
>     proposal to add a requirement for GAC advice to be accompanied by a
>     rationale. Given the general acceptance of proposals for rationales
>     in other areas, I would have thought it would have at least been
>     given a note in the prep document.
>
>     Look forward to discussing on Tues.
>
>     *From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>     <mailto: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 *Alice Jansen
>     *Sent:* Friday, January 15, 2016 12:01 PM
>     *To:* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>     <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>     *Subject:* [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)
>
>     _Sent on behalf of CCWG-ACCT Co-Chairs_
>
>     In preparation for your R/ecommendation 11 – GAC Advice (first
>     reading)/ discussion scheduled for your call #78 - Tuesday, 19
>     January 2016 (12:00 – 15:00 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
>     <mailto: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
>     <mailto: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
>