Besides that ALAC members have not show to be reliable, I do not believe we can go that road, ie exclude participants from decision making. As much as I personally would like it. The below quote means to me that if there is no or little dissent, that's that. But if there is so much dissent by members and/or participants that a determination needs to be made, only the members would be asked. But, why are we discussing this? So far "they" were/was the Co-Chair(s). el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On 29 Dec 2015, at 23:32, Chartier, Mike S <mike.s.chartier@intel.com> wrote:
Got it Fine with me
From: Alan Greenberg [mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca] Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2015 4:18 PM To: Chartier, Mike S <mike.s.chartier@intel.com>; avri@acm.org Cc: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] Work plan in January
I was using "vote" implying to determine a level of consensus. The critical part is that it is a process involving Members (but not participants). -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos.
On December 29, 2015 3:50:14 PM EST, "Chartier, Mike S" <mike.s.chartier@intel.com> wrote: Alan, Can you point out where the Charter gives voting rights to members? The relevant text below seems to say just the opposite. In developing its Proposal(s), work plan and any other reports, the CCWG-Accountability shall seek to act by consensus. Consensus calls should always make best efforts to involve all members (the CCWG-Accountability or sub-working group). The Chair(s) shall be responsible for designating each position as having one of the following designations: a) Full Consensus - a position where no minority disagrees; identified by an absence of objection b) Consensus – a position where a small minority disagrees, but most agree In the absence of Full Consensus, the Chair(s) should allow for the submission of minority viewpoint(s) and these, along with the consensus view, shall be included in the report. In a rare case, the chair(s) may decide that the use of a poll is reasonable to assess the level of support for a recommendation. However, care should be taken in using polls that they do not become votes, as there are often disagreements about the meanings of the poll questions or of the poll results.
Thanks, Mike
From: Alan Greenberg [mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca] Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2015 3:18 PM To: Chartier, Mike S <mike.s.chartier@intel.com>; avri@acm.org Cc: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Work plan in January
I read the "they" as being the formally appointed CCWG Members, to whom the charter gives voting rights.
Alan
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community