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.
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