On 30/04/2015 13:27, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
The issue came up of AOC type review bylaws being or not being fundamental bylaws in the context of the CWG IANA Review Function.
The possibility of tagging individual bylaws as fundamental or not was mentioned.
If such a capability exists, I would recommend that the bylaw defining the Accountability and Transparency Review be tagged as a fundamental bylaw.
The commitment to have AoC reviews is embodied in the Core Values, which I believe we do intend to tag as fundamental. I'm not sure that it is a good idea to tag as fundamental the more detailed bylaws on how the AoCs are to work and what they are to consider. We may well wish to amend or supplement these later, in the light of experience (maybe even soon, in the light of our deliberations on WS2). Tagging too much as fundamental, and then needing to change it rapidly and frequently, would devalue the protection for those things for which there is no foreseeable reason to change them, and every reason to wish them to be deeply entrenched. -- 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