[CWG-Stewardship] Charter interpretation

Seun Ojedeji seun.ojedeji at gmail.com
Tue Jun 23 17:47:06 UTC 2015


Hi Jonathan,

Thank you for confirming this, i had similar thinking as well but after
consulting the charter it seemed confusing hence my questions. So just to
be extra clear, could you confirm the 3 question below with a yes/no
response so one can provide informed response to any member of the
community asking:

- If there are comments/suggestions from any of the chartering
organisations that requires update of the proposal they would NOT be added
into the current CWG proposal?

- The comments/updates could/will be considered after submitting the
current proposal and an Addendum to the proposal can be sent to ICG?

- If one(or more) chartering organisation refuse/makes a conditionally
acceptance, the current proposal will still be forwarded to the ICG in its
current form?

Regards

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson at afilias.info>
wrote:

> Seun,
>
>
>
> The current proposal before the chartering organisations is the Final
> Transition Proposal i.e. it is not a draft.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> *From:* Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 23 June 2015 12:55
> *To:* cwg-stewardship at icann.org
> *Subject:* [CWG-Stewardship] Charter interpretation
>
>
>
> Dear Co-Chairs, all
>
> Re-reading the CWG charter, I like to get some clarification/correction on
> my interpretation of the CWG charter. Sections below:
>
> *Final Transition Proposal *
>
> After receiving the notifications from all chartering organizations as
> described above, the co-chairs of the WG shall, within ten working days
> after receiving the last notification, submit the Final Transition Proposal
> to the Chairs of all the chartering organizations..............In the event
> one or more of the chartering organizations do(es) not support (parts of)
> the Final Proposal, the Final Proposal should clearly indicate which parts
> are fully supported and which parts that are not, and which chartering
> organization dissents from the CWG view.
> In the event that no consensus is reached by the CWG, the Final Report will document the process that was
> followed and will be submitted to the chartering
> organizations to request possible suggestions for mitigating the issues
> that are preventing consensus......
>
>
>
> Based on the section above, i like to get response/confirmation on the
> following assumption:
>
> - That the current proposal is final "draft" of the CWG
>
> - That the CWG would reconvene to update the curent draft based on
> response from the chartering organisation.
>
> - That another consensus call will still be made by the CWG to produce a
> final proposal to be submited
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> --
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      *
> *http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng>**Mobile:
> +2348035233535 <%2B2348035233535>*
> *alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
> <seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*
>
> The key to understanding is humility - my view !
>
>
>



-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------





*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
<seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*

The key to understanding is humility - my view !
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150623/4dc77f71/attachment.html>


More information about the CWG-Stewardship mailing list