Hi all, hi Alan: On 18 August 2015 at 17:31, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
I have two questions related to Section 7.1
- The terms "veto" and "reject" a budget seem to be used interchangeably to refer to the same action. If that is the case, it should be explicitly stated, and perhaps only a single term used.
I think a single term would be helpful. Veto is probably the more honest of the two.
- Paragraphs 389 and 390 seem to be at odds with each other. 389 says that if there is a second community veto, the previous year's budget will be used. 390 talks about the community's judgement of the Board's response to a 2nd veto, but under the proposed 389, there is no opportunity for a Board obeying the Bylaws to do anything other than comply. What form of response is 390 envisioning which would be non-compliant?
390 refers to the Board's overall response to the concerns being raised. It identifies that the community has a choice - to use this Budget power, either once or twice, and/or to go on and use one of the other powers. I think it's reasonable to assume that the Board would respond (i.e. make a comment) to a second veto, as well as following the bylaws in staying within the previous year's budget for the rest of the financial year. The tone and content of that comment will probably help determine whether the community wants to take any further action. I don't see a conflict, but I see unclear drafting.... does this make sense? cheers Jordan
Alan
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- Jordan Carter Chief Executive *InternetNZ* +64-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob) Email: jordan@internetnz.net.nz Skype: jordancarter Web: www.internetnz.nz *A better world through a better Internet *