Nigel+1
Kavouss

Sent from my iPhone

> On 18 Jan 2016, at 10:42, Nigel Roberts <nigel@channelisles.net> wrote:
>
> Folks
>
> I disagree.
>
> Unless there are objective standards set for such removal, then the requirement of a provision of a rationale opens up the Corporation for unlimited litigation based on whether the rationale provided was a good reason for removal.
>
> The ONLY objective rationale for removal is that "X% of those entitled to vote in the matter have voted for removal".
>
> You will not, obviously, achieve X% unless a convincing reason is put.
>
> But a convincing reason can, quite reasonably be that "we (the SO, for example) do not like his/her performance on the Board"
>
> The requirement for justifying a petition is just a way to make it harder for those seeking to exercise the power.
>
>
>
>> On 01/18/2016 08:46 AM, Chartier, Mike S wrote:
>> Sure.
>>
>> For instance with regard to removal of individual Board members, our
>> third proposal required a rationale to be provided before the Community
>> conference. In our call #74 it was proposed to include a rationale even
>> earlier in the process at the petition phase.
>>
>> It seems to be a good idea that when there is some action proposed, that
>> a reason is given for why the action is needed.
>>
>> *From:*Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Monday, January 18, 2016 3:16 AM
>> *To:* Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>
>> *Cc:* Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc@gmail.com>; Chartier, Mike S
>> <mike.s.chartier@intel.com>; accountability-cross-community@icann.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Thank you for your message and reminders,
>>
>> May I ask you to kindly give atleast few example of any of those "
>> Rationale"
>>
>> Tks
>>
>> Kavouss
>>
>> 2016-01-18 9:10 GMT+01:00 Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr
>> <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>>:
>>
>>    Mike,
>>
>>    Good catch indeed. Precisely the point of our first reading exercise.
>>
>>    So we will add this to recommendation 11 agenda item tomorrow.
>>
>>    I will note that the current annex includes a related recommendation :
>>
>>    ·Insert a mention for all ACs: “The AC will make every effort to
>>    ensure that the advice provided is clear and supported by a rationale.”
>>
>>    Best,
>>
>>    Mathieu
>>
>>    *De :*accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org
>>    <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>
>>    [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org
>>    <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>] *De la
>>    part de* Greg Shatan
>>    *Envoyé :* lundi 18 janvier 2016 05:30
>>    *À :* Chartier, Mike S
>>    *Cc :* accountability-cross-community@icann.org
>>    <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>
>>    *Objet :* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)
>>
>>    Mike,
>>
>>    Good point and good catch.  This should not have been overlooked.
>>
>>    Greg
>>
>>    On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Chartier, Mike S
>>    <mike.s.chartier@intel.com <mailto:mike.s.chartier@intel.com>> wrote:
>>
>>    I think this is another illustration of how we need to be careful in
>>    documenting the process for handling comments (other than the
>>    Boards). For Recommendation 11 several commenters offered the
>>    proposal to add a requirement for GAC advice to be accompanied by a
>>    rationale. Given the general acceptance of proposals for rationales
>>    in other areas, I would have thought it would have at least been
>>    given a note in the prep document.
>>
>>    Look forward to discussing on Tues.
>>
>>    *From:*accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org
>>    <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>
>>    [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org
>>    <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>] *On
>>    Behalf Of *Alice Jansen
>>    *Sent:* Friday, January 15, 2016 12:01 PM
>>    *To:* accountability-cross-community@icann.org
>>    <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>
>>    *Subject:* [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)
>>
>>    _Sent on behalf of CCWG-ACCT Co-Chairs_
>>
>>    In preparation for your R/ecommendation 11 – GAC Advice (first
>>    reading)/ discussion scheduled for your call #78 - Tuesday, 19
>>    January 2016 (12:00 – 15:00 UTC) - please find attached the material
>>    to review.
>>
>>    Please use this email thread to circulate any comments you may have
>>    in advance of the call.
>>
>>    Thank you
>>
>>    Mathieu, Thomas, León
>>
>>
>>    _______________________________________________
>>    Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>    Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
>>    <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>
>>    https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
>>    _______________________________________________
>>    Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>    Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
>>    <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>
>>    https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community