On 23/04/2015 05:11, Jordan Carter wrote:
Hi all
For those not on the call, the attached is to deal with a gap in the draft comment report.
It has only come into existence in the past 24h as we realised the gap.
Apols for the short notice, as explained by Mathieu.
Dear Jordan and Becky, Thank you for spotting this omission, and producing this proposal to address it. I would like to support it in all respects save one, the threshold for changing fundamental bylaws, which I think you have set too low. You say that "ICANN should be able to expand its Mission only under very limited circumstances". I agree, but I do not think that 3/4 Board plus an unspecified supermajority of the community council is high enough. Compare the process to spill the Board, a near consensus ("75%/85%") is required in 2/3s of the SOs and ACs to even ask the community council to consider a spill. I do not think that spilling the Board should be harder to achieve than expanding the Mission, so I propose that we also require a near consensus in 2/3s of the SOACs (including at least one SO) for a change in Fundamental Bylaws to be considered by the community council. Kind Regards, Malcolm. -- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/ London Internet Exchange Ltd 21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA