Dear Co-Chairs, FWIW, I think at this point, it will be good to have an understanding of where we are heading from the Co-Chairs. In some discussions it seem we have understood and agreed that a model that implies a structural change is impractical during this transition phase hence the suggestion made by Steve. Yet in other discussions it seem we are going ahead with the structural change model irrespective of the concerns raised from parts of the community and board. In other to prepare towards Dublin and contribute in a meaningful way, I think a summary of where we are presently and what is expected to be achieved in Dublin will be helpful. I apologise if this has already been shared, and in that case a pointer will be appreciated. Regards Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 Kindly excuse brevity and typos. On 10 Oct 2015 19:37, "Stephen Deerhake" <sdeerhake@nic.as> wrote:
Paul,
Perhaps the Board chair is articulating a minority viewpoint? Afterall, the Board will have to vote on the matter of sending/not sending the output of the CCWG on to NTIA.
Stephen Deerhake
-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Paul Rosenzweig Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2015 6:05 AM To: 'Bruce Tonkin' <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>; 'Accountability Cross Community' <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Blog post on the Accountability work headed to Dublin
With respect Bruce, I share Anne's view that this is not accurate. The Board chair has stated unequivocally that the Board will not submit a Membership based proposal. That is contrary to the statement that the Board will submit any proposal it receives from the CCWG "as is." That is categorically ruling out one type of "as is" proposal.
If you are seriously telling me that even after all this back and forth the Board actually would submit a "Membership only" based proposal to the NTIA then I would respectfully say that the Board has done a very poor job of communicating.
So ... answer this question please as directly as you are willing: If, today, the CCWG having considered but declined to accept the Board's input were to submit a proposal based upon a Membership organization would the Board transmit it to the NTIA as the ICANN proposal?
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key
-----Original Message----- From: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au] Sent: Friday, October 9, 2015 10:03 PM To: 'Accountability Cross Community' <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Blog post on the Accountability work headed to Dublin
Hello Paul,
Regarding:
https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2015-02-12-en
The statement still holds.
The Board has provided input on a draft document so far, and has stated all along that it would raise any concerns along the way and not wait for a final proposal to raise any concerns.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community