Dear All, We need to carefully examine Avri,s Comment.' Should the proposed language change the meaning or open any avenue for interpretation then must: 1. Avoid to do it and 2. Not putting the new language under the cover of clarification Regards Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 12 Dec 2015, at 17:27, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
On 11-Dec-15 12:13, Greg Shatan wrote: (a) there are existing PICs that are outside ICANN's Mission,
I am sure there are, or at least could be. The conditions that some applicants had to put into their applications to meet requirements such as those for community and geographical and such to restrict access to certain populations could well be interpreted as beyond the scope of the ICANN mission.
or (b) the new Mission language is changing ICANN's Mission and not merely clarifying it.
Of course it is changing it. The mission is not only expressed in the negotiated wording, but the interpretations made of those words over the years. By changing the wording we change the basis for interpretation - I expect that was the intent for some among those who wanted to constrain the mission. The negotiations that have been ongoing on the wording seem to me to be intended to change the practical interpretation of the mission. This is not just clarification.
avri
--- 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