On 3 Mar 2017 21:30, "Malcolm Hutty" <malcolm@linx.net> wrote: On 02/03/2017 18:52, avri doria wrote:
While there were a few terms we could not come to agreement on, we have produced the enclosed draft terminology. It includes alternatives in the places where we disagreed.
I don't think there is even such a thing as "representatives" of the SOACs in the Empowered Community process, but even if there were, there is a distinction between individuals and the entity. SO: I think this was attempting to describe what the EC is in practice because they are indeed representatives of the respective SO/AC in the room(the entity) I don't think we should encourage people to use the term Empowered Community in a manner inconsistent with the formal Bylaws definition; this will only generate more of the confusion your paper seeks to resolve. SO: I will take an exception to this as I think interpreting legal text (bylaw) in a manner that makes easy understanding without losing the legal interpretation would achieve the intent of this process as well. Regards 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 Monument Place, 24 Monument Street London EC3R 8AJ Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community