On 17-Jan-16 11:52, Schaefer, Brett wrote:
> Just to be clear, I was speaking generally, not just on the HR rec.

On the subject of processing all comments, I too believe we need to do
this on all recommendations. Even the ones where I am possibly in a
minority position.

I think Kavouss is right, we need to have a clear picture of the pros
and cons on all the recommendation, i.e. scorecards.  And then need to
work through them.

I disagree that the Board comments are somehow a collective viewpoint
that is more equal that the other collective and individual viewpoints.
Until they actually weight the results of the CCWG, they will not have
the bottom-up multistakeholder take on the issue that our processes
demand.  At the moment, I see the Board view as advisory, giving us a
hint of what their decisions might be at the end of the day.  We need to
take their advice seriously, just as we need to take all advice and
opinion as expressed, or yet to be expressed, seriously.  Only once we
have finished the work and enter the next stage of the process, will we
be in a situation of negotiation over the content of their response to
the community's proposal.

avri

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community