Kavouss, all: That is the situation today. Why would advice be any more or less likely than it is today? best Jordan On 22 February 2016 at 12:03, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:
Andrew,
I am sorry, you missed the point that I raised
The point was ,with ST18, the GAC will totally be disabled to agree on such consensus ADVICE as one single government could always oppose to the Advice. This was purposely injected in the Recommendation
That is the meaning of rare advice.
Pls kindly read the text as it MEANT and kindly not turn it around
Regards
Kavouss .
2016-02-21 23:38 GMT+01:00 Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>:
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 10:12:57PM +0100, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
*Consequently the so-called special privilege repeatedly referred to by others would in fact very rarely happens *
In that case, of course, the carve-out doesn't take effect anyway. So if this is in fact to be so rare, why would anyone argue that it needs to be changed? The argument, "Such-and-thus effect is never going to happen, so we must set up the procedures around it perfectly," doesn't really seem to hang together.
Best regards,
A
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com _______________________________________________ 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
-- Jordan Carter Chief Executive *InternetNZ - your voice for the Open Internet* +64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob) Email: jordan@internetnz.net.nz Skype: jordancarter Web: www.internetnz.nz