Hello,
Thanks for the share, looking at the compromise proposal it does seem the group is also telling the board how it should decide on GAC advice. Will there be anything wrong in changing the following:
"....may be rejected by a majority vote of the Board."
To:
"....may be rejected by the Board."
Shouldn't the board be able to determine how they make their decision in this particular case, especially considering that any board decision/resolution would normally get a room check for those in support.
That said, if my suggested edit is not acceptable, will be good to consider applying the proposed "decision making" text across ACs.
Regards
Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
Dear Colleagues,
Please find attached a report from the ST18 subgroup, for discussion during the CCWG call in about 12 hours. This is a co-chair summary, with options about which we will discuss in order to define our group’s way forward for the Draft Report.
I want to express my warmest appreciation and thanks to all the ST18 subgroup colleagues who participated with great interest to our work, and especially to the colleagues who provided constructive inputs to these discussions.
Best
Mathieu
De : Mathieu Weill [mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr]
Envoyé : lundi 23 novembre 2015 18:39
À : s18@icann.org
Objet : ST18 subgroup report Nov 23
Dear Colleagues,
Please find attached the (very summarized) report of our work that will be presented tomorrow in the CCWG. It will be circulated momentarily to the full group.
Thanks again for all the constructive and valuable inputs you have provided to advance this key item of our work.
Best,
Mathieu
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community