No Avri. At the end of the day it rests with the court as I believe is clear from the note from JD.

After a finding by an arbitration panel that a bylaw has been breached, it is a matter for the Board about how they remedy (as I believe is the case with the member model also) and that remedy is itself subject to a claim that it breaches a bylaw (if the community has consensus). If the Board refuses to abide by the ruling then a court can order them to do so.

Have I misunderstood the way the member model works. I believe Becky has said numerous times that the only finding could be that the relevant bylaw has been breached, NOT that the Board must take a specific action. Is that wrong?

Cheers,

Chris

On 2 Oct 2015, at 20:46 , Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:

Hi,

That was one of my favorite lines as well.

And is a key point. In the current model, and as far as I can tell in
the MEM, at the end of the day, all always rests "within the Board's
discretion."

avri

On 02-Oct-15 05:29, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
I really LOVE this one:

[...]
"the Board is required to remedy that violation, within the
Board’s discretion."
[...]

(last line on Page 1)

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community