[CCWG-ACCT] Open ALAC Issues

[Kavouss Arasteh]

There are many comments that were not possible to be agreed upon.
Regards
Kavousd

Sent from my iPhone

> On 27 Jan 2016, at 19:20, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
> 
> This was not meant to start a debate. It was one of the issues raised in the ALAC comments and I said I would list the open ones. I di not think it needs debate, just perhaps an aditional sentence added in the proposal.
> 
> Alan
> 
> At 27/01/2016 09:02 AM, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
>> Dear All,
>> I think people contuinue to go to the last milimiter of the road and generate a new discussion and debate about the number of représentatives in Unincorprated associattion  représentatives and start a new round of bebates and dispute
>> Do we need this information now pls ?
>> Kavouss 
>> 
>> 2016-01-27 6:14 GMT+01:00 Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca >:
>> As per my comment in the CCWG meeting earlier today, here is a list of the issues still to be resolved from the ALAC statement on the 3rd Draft Proposal.
>> 
>> 
>> There are three issues currently under discussion.
>> 
>> 1. ICANN Mission and ensuring that contract provisions will not be invalidated or be unenforceable.
>> 
>> 2. The issue regarding market mechanisms.
>> 
>> 3. Human Rights (original issue resolved but pending final wording).
>> 
>> 
>> Issues to be addressed.
>> 
>> 
>> 1. The first is a relatively trivial one and easily addressed. Rec# 4, in the section on replacing the Interim Board states:
>> 
>> "SOs, ACs, and the Nominating Committee will develop replacement processes that ensure the Interim Board will not be in place for more than 120 days."
>> 
>> The ALAC request that this be changed to:
>> 
>> "SOs, ACs, and the Nominating Committee will develop processes designed to replace Interim Board members within 120 days."
>> 
>> By removing the word "ensure", this change, while not altering the intent, goes along with the recent practice of not putting hard deadlines in the Bylaws, deadlines that for one reason or another may not be met in a particular instance.
>> 
>> 
>> 2. Rec# 10, AoC. The Recommendation suggests that as part of organizational reviews, the AC/SO's accountability be included in the review. The ALAC suggests that this be enshrined in Article IV, Section 4.1 of the ICANN Bylaws.
>> 
>> 
>> 3. On page 14, item 2 of the draft proposal (and on page 5 of Annex 1), it says "The members of the unincorporated association would be representatives of ICANN's Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees that wish to participate." We have never discussed how such members are identified. Presumably we should to specify that each participating AC/SO must identify who it's representative will be.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20160127/b2c9ffe5/attachment.html>