[CCWG-ACCT] ICANN Board comments - Recommendation 3 - Fundamental Bylaws

Andrew Sullivan ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
Sun Jan 24 22:22:44 UTC 2016

On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 10:14:41AM -0500, Greg Shatan wrote:
> I agree with the result the Board came to (at least in part), but not the
> reasoning.


> exercise its powers through the Designator.  As a practical matter, this
> can be solved by having any of the SOs or ACs exercise the inspection
> right, so we're covered that way.)

Since the bylaws don't contain the reasoning for why a particular
arrangement happens, but instead just contains the arrangement, what
difference does it make the reasons people have to believe the
conclusion we seem to be reaching?  I like the emphasis on the
practical matter: let's find a way to make the outcome right.

It seems to me that making inspection a community power rather than
one of the designator rather improves the value of inspection to the
community, so we should embrace that conclusion (regardess of why
people think it's the right one) and move on.

Best regards,


Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list