hi Matthew, Just following up on this: On 13 January 2016 at 22:47, Matthew Shears <mshears@cdt.org> wrote:
Thanks Jordan - agree with proposed changes. Just a couple things:
Page 7 para 12 - I think we can remove the words " within six days" in the second bullet as it is clear that support must be achieved in 7 days
Good, will update.
Para 27 page 11 - I may have missed the discussion/rationale this but assume this is marked N/A because it is an approval and not a rejection?
Yes, that's right - there's no threshold to have a forum because the forum happens automatically (the Board passing a decision about a change to fundamental bylaws requires the community process to happen so the community can decide whether to allow the change or not).
Para 3 page 1 and para 50 page 12 - reference to % - did we agree that such a an approach would be taken if so do we need to refer to %s in the threshold table?
I can't recall where we got to on this, hoping cochairs can help - don't think we spent time on it yesterday? cheers Jordan
Thanks
Matthew
On 13/01/2016 06:40, Jordan Carter wrote:
Hi all
Attached in PDF and Word are my tracked changes building on the work Bernie/Alice did to do the changes to the timeframes for escalation.
Thanks for kicking it off, Alice and Bernie and others!
The comments together form a second reading draft for the call on Thursday.
This approach, in essence:
- has a two-SO/AC requirement to petition for any of the powers (except whole Board recall - that would be three SOs/ACs) - ditches the Conference Call stage - extends timeframes for SO/AC decision
This new approach is in recognition of the desire noted by SOs and ACs to have longer timeframes than the previous process allowed, and in recognition that in exercising any of the community powers, a reasonable amount of informal community dialogue and discussion is highly likely - and so SOs and ACs will have had several weeks to consider the issue before the final 21 days allowed to decide after the Forum.
The new timeframes flow as follows, with this showing maximum possible time:
21 days: Petition deadline for first SO/AC
+
7 days: Time for a second/third SO/AC to sign on for the petition
[if no valid petition, lapses]
+
21 days: Time within which Community Forum must be organised {note - within 7 days of valid petition, written rationale must be circulated - this does not go "on top of" the 21 days for the Forum, it is within it.}
+
21 days: Time within which SOs and ACs must decide whether to exercise the power.
So the longest possible time is 70 days.
There's included an ability by the SO or ACs petitioning to extent to the next in-person meeting, EXCEPT (a new exception) where it's about the Budget power - we cannot put the budgets on hold for months, in my view.....
cheers Jordan
-- Jordan Carter
Chief Executive *InternetNZ*
+64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob) Email: jordan@internetnz.net.nz Skype: jordancarter Web: <http://www.internetnz.nz>www.internetnz.nz
*A better world through a better Internet *
-- Jordan Carter Chief Executive, InternetNZ
+64-21-442-649 | jordan@internetnz.net.nz
Sent on the run, apologies for brevity
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing listAccountability-Cross-Community@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--
Matthew Shears Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology mshears@cdt.org+ 44 771 247 2987
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig...> This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig...>
-- Jordan Carter Chief Executive *InternetNZ* +64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob) Email: jordan@internetnz.net.nz Skype: jordancarter Web: www.internetnz.nz *A better world through a better Internet *