[Internal-cg] consensus building
Martin.Boyle at nominet.org.uk
Wed Sep 3 21:08:08 UTC 2014
Thank you Alissa: this reflects my concerns well. I note that we did this discussion entirely by e-mail, so I can understand how Wolf-Ulrich missed it.
I have a couple of other comments - all are in the marked-up draft attached and placed in drop-box.
From: internal-cg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:internal-cg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Alissa Cooper
Sent: 03 September 2014 11:29
To: Wolf-Ulrich Knoben; internal-cg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] consensus building
Thanks for your work on this.
On 9/2/14, 1:19 AM, "WUKnoben" <wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de> wrote:
>* “small minority”: should further be discussed. I added
> the condition that a recommendation is not reached if at least one of
> communities (according to the list) as a whole is firmly and formally
> That would mean a formal written objection by the community
> behalf of their community.
I’m not sure this matches what was being discussed on the list. If we use the text Martin had suggested, I think the third bullet under section 4(b) should read:
"After enough time has passed for the ICG to consider and attempt to accommodate objections, the ICG can reach a conclusion if at most a small minority disagrees and their objections have been documented. It is not expected that the representatives of an operational community significantly and directly affected by a conclusion would be overruled in this process.”
Internal-cg mailing list
Internal-cg at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ICG-Consensus Building_draft_v5 + MB.doc
Size: 82432 bytes
Desc: ICG-Consensus Building_draft_v5 + MB.doc
More information about the Internal-cg