[CCWG-ACCT] Request for Clarification on Threshold Issue

Tue Mar 1 21:29:28 UTC 2016

Dear Brett
I am protective of all So7AC.
You misunderstood me totally.
Everybody wants to decide on whether or not GAC participate in decision
making
I simply said we do not know yet. Leave it to them to decide and be patient.
It is not the time to talk whether we would have 5 or 4 SO/AC.
Please then kindly do not put any words in my mouth.
Tks being so kind and read the text as it was.
Regards
Kavouss

2016-03-01 19:48 GMT+01:00 Schaefer, Brett <Brett.Schaefer at heritage.org>:

> Avri,
>
>
>
> I have been paying attention to the overall discussion, but I have paid
> particularly close attention to this issue. After multiple, lengthy
> discussions, I thought that we had agreed that it was up to the GAC to
> decide to be in or out.
>
>
>
> I thought that THAT was the compromise, not that the GAC was in by
> default, but could choose to be out. If this had been made clear, I would
> have been very vocal in opposing it. The text on this issue in the final
> CCWG-Accountability report is ambiguous:
>
>
>
> 99. Implementation of the Empowered Community currently anticipates that
> all of ICANN’s SOs, the ALAC and GAC (if the GAC chooses to participate)
> would participate in the Empowered Community – that is, they will be listed
> in the Bylaws as the five Decisional Participants.
>
>
>
> I read that as GAC participation was dependent on an affirmative GAC
> decision to participate. Most apparently disagree with this interpretation.
>
>
>
> I know that most of the CCWG-Accountability is ready to move on, but I
> hope the implications – that the practical ability of the EC to actually
> exercise its powers will be much harder with a habitually indecisive GAC as
> a participant  – are widely understood.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Brett
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Brett Schaefer
> Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
> Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security
> and Foreign Policy
> The Heritage Foundation
> 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
> Washington, DC 20002
> 202-608-6097
> heritage.org
>
> *From:* accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Avri
> Doria
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 01, 2016 12:23 PM
> *To:* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Request for Clarification on Threshold Issue
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I thought doing it this way was one of the earlier compromises in this
> extended end game.
>
> avri
>
>
> On 01-Mar-16 11:37, Schaefer, Brett wrote:
> >
> > Kavouss,
> >
> >
> >
> > I am mildly surprised that you, as someone who has been very
> > protective of the right of the GAC to make its own decisions, is not
> > upset with the determination by the CCWG to make GAC a decisional
> > participant by default before it has actually made this decision for
> > itself.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best,
> >
> >
> >
> > Brett
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> > [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf
> > Of *Kavouss Arasteh
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 01, 2016 11:28 AM
> > *To:* Mathieu Weill; Thomas Rickert; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía
> > *Cc:* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> > *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Request for Clarification on Threshold Issue
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Yo are too worried about something that we still do not know how it
> > happens
> >
> > The text approriate and clearly mention that if the No of Decision
> > Making SO and AC changed the threshold should be adjusted
> >
> > That is more than sufficient.
> >
> > People need to refrain concentrating/ focussing on a particular AC nor
> > envisage all possible senarios.
> >
> > We are not wtritting Bylaws at this stage .
> >
> > There is ample time and competent individuals to look at the matter
> > once happened.
> >
> > Let us discontinue this counterproductive discussion
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Kavouss
> >
> >
> >
> > 2016-03-01 16:32 GMT+01:00 Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu
> <milton at gatech.edu%0b>> <mailto:milton at gatech.edu <milton at gatech.edu>>>:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:*Jordan Carter [mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz
> > <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
> <jordan at internetnz.net.nz%0b%3e%20%3cmailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz%3e>]
> >
> > Sorry, wrong. The assumption has been made and it is the same as the
> > assumption that was made in the Third, Second and First Draft Reports.
> > GAC is going to be listed in the fundamental bylaws as a decisional
> > participant in the Empowered Community.
> >
> >
> >
> > Huh? See below
> >
> >
> >
> > The only way that could change would be if GAC advised it did not wish
> > to do so. Same with any other group.
> >
> >
> >
> > Which they haven’t done yet. Ergo, my statement below was correct.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 1 March 2016 at 13:16, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu
> <milton at gatech.edu%0b>> <mailto:milton at gatech.edu <milton at gatech.edu>>>
> wrote:
> >
> > Whether one agrees with Brett or not, the fact remains that GAC
> > has explicitly told us that it is _/undecided/_ on whether to be a
> > decisional participant or not. Therefore, until we get a positive
> > decision from them, we cannot assume that they will be by default.
> > Greg S. was saying essentially the same thing:
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > BrettSchaefer
> > Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
> > Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National
> > Security and Foreign Policy
> > The Heritage Foundation
> > 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
> > Washington, DC 20002
> > 202-608-6097
> > heritage.org <http://heritage.org/>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> > Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> > <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> <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
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160301/d67d5858/attachment-0001.html>