Chris, my professional opinion is that more than size it matters how you wield it :-)-O el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On Sep 12, 2015, at 14:19, Chris Disspain <ceo@auda.org.au> wrote:
Ah…so, clearly, size does matter….to some…..
With respect, you can’t be serious.
Cheers,
Chris
On 12 Sep 2015, at 21:50 , Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
Dear Seun
With respect, you can’t be serious. The Board’s alternate proposal is a 3-page memo. The CCWG’s proposal is an integrated 180 page documents which, even if you limit yourself to the parts directly related to the Single Member model (not including stress tests, or the fundamental bylaws themselves) is roughly 8-10x as long (depending on how you count it) ….
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key
From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 9:40 PM To: Jordan Carter <jordan@internetnz.net.nz> Cc: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Board comments now in
Hi Jordan,
I don't think there is so much details to develop than what we currently have with the sole member (which by the way also requires a lot of details).
I think the main question we need to ask the CCWG legal is whether the leadership of the SO/AC(for instance) can indeed have legal standing under the California law. Every other aspect of MEM seem to make sense to me and just the clarity on the possibility of enforcement is what lawyers needs to come in on.
Perhaps it's also good to note that what is being proposed by board has been discussed one way or the other in the past but somehow we did not follow-up on the thoughts up.
Regards
Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
hi all
You may be interested to read the comments from the ICANN board which have now been lodged:
http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-ccwg-accountability-03aug15/msg00045.h...
I'd draw your attention to the cover note / summary and to the memo on the MEM.
It's good to see some concrete proposals from the Board to take into account as we refine the proposal.
An initial observation - there is a lot of detail that would need to be developed if the alternative proposal was to be complete enough to undergo stress testing, based on an initial scan.
Happy reading!
Cheers Jordan
-- Jordan Carter Chief Executive, InternetNZ +64-21-442-649 | jordan@internetnz.net.nz
Sent on the run, apologies for brevity
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community