[Ccpdp-rm] Fundamental Fairness and Bindingness

[Dr Eberhard W Lisse]

Nick,

you are welcome.

The question whether our mechanism (aka "lighter touch") is binding is
not open in my view. It must be (says so in the RFC for starters).

The questions is how will that mechanism look like :-)-O

I understand where you are coming from (lawyer and all :-)-O) but if
it's in a Bylaw that "lighter touch" is binding, it is.

el

On 21/09/2021 15:24, Nick Wenban-Smith wrote:
> Very interesting and informative read, thanks for sharing.
> 
> Might need a bit of time to reflect some more on it but it would
> strongly support that a review mechanism such as the IRP is tantamount
> to a binding arbitration process; open question whether a lighter
> touch review mechanism would also be binding.
> 
> It's actually very reassuring to read in black and white the
> accountability mechanisms do seem to work!
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ccpdp-rm <ccpdp-rm-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Dr Eberhard W Lisse via Ccpdp-rm
> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2021 1:32 PM
> To: ccpdp-rm at icann.org
> Subject: [Ccpdp-rm] Fundamental Fairness and Bindingness
> 
> All,
> 
> I have had the opportunity to read
> 
[...]

-- 
Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse   \         /       Obstetrician & Gynaecologist
el at lisse.NA             / *      |  Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
PO Box 8421 Bachbrecht  \      /  If this email is signed with GPG/PGP
10007, Namibia           ;____/ Sect 20 of Act No. 4 of 2019 may apply
	  Book your Covid-10 Vaccination at https://c19.idtoday.com.na