Dear Kavouss, all, I am sorry if I wasn’t clear enough. The comment stated in my previous email is indeed the Danish view regarding Stress Test 18 and is not a GAC position. The GAC as whole has yet to discuss this important issue in detail. Best regards, Julia Fra: Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com] Sendt: 13. april 2015 12:01 Til: Julia Katja Wolman; Thomas.Schneider@bakom.admin.ch Cc: wp1@icann.org; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Emne: Re: [WP1] Document for WP1 and WP2: Stress test 18 and proposed bylaws change regarding GAC advice Dear Julia, Thank you very much for your message. I understand that Denmark is supporting the Draft when you said Quote " we support the proposed amendments to the Bylaws for the same reasons as stated below by Alice." Unquote Any support from GAN AS A WHOLE SHALL FIRST BE DISCUSSED, EXAMINED ,DEBATED AND THEN COMMENTED BY gac physical meeting DUE TO THE FACT THAT THIS IS A CRUCIAL AND FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE WHICH NEEDS THE ENTIRE GAV VIEWS Regards Kavouss 2015-04-13 11:51 GMT+02:00 Julia Katja Wolman <jukacz@erst.dk<mailto:jukacz@erst.dk>>: Dear all, In line with our earlier comments regarding Stress Test 18 (here and in the GAC), we support the proposed amendments to the Bylaws for the same reasons as stated below by Alice. Best regards, Julia Julia Katja Wolman DANISH BUSINESS AUTHORITY Dahlerups Pakhus Langelinie Allé 17 DK-2100 København Ø Telephone: +45 3529 1000<tel:%2B45%203529%201000> Direct: +45 35291308<tel:%2B45%2035291308> E-mail: jukacz@erst.dk<mailto:jukacz@erst.dk> www.erhvervsstyrelsen.dk<http://www.erhvervsstyrelsen.dk> MINISTRY FOR BUSINESS AND GROWTH P Please consider the environment before printing this email. Fra: wp1-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wp1-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:wp1-bounces@icann.org<mailto:wp1-bounces@icann.org>] På vegne af Alice Munyua Sendt: 10. april 2015 22:18 Til: wp1@icann.org<mailto:wp1@icann.org> Emne: Re: [WP1] Document for WP1 and WP2: Stress test 18 and proposed bylaws change regarding GAC advice Dear Cheryl, Steve and all I would like to share our views on stress test 18 in anticipation of our discussions next week regarding the same. We consider stress Test 18 necessary and appropriate. We support proposed amendment to the bylaw and believe they do not interfere with the GAC’s working methods. We agree that the proposed amendments would protect and strengthen GAC’s consensus decision making, while improving accountability by mitigating against capture or influence by any one stakeholder group. The board currently responds to, and provides explanations to GAC advice. GAC operating principles provide for full range of views to be presented in cases where there is no consensus advice and should therefore not trigger the by laws provisions. Best regards Alice Munyua On 07/04/2015 23:19, Steve DelBianco wrote: Jordan — Someone noticed I had an incomplete sentence at top of page 2, which was left over from a previous draft. I removed it in this draft in order to avoid confusion. — Steve From: Jordan Carter Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2015 at 3:14 AM To: Steve DelBianco Cc: "wp1@icann.org<mailto:wp1@icann.org>", "ccwg-accountability4@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-accountability4@icann.org>", ACCT-Staff, Accountability Cross Community Subject: Re: Document for WP1 and WP2: Stress test 18 and proposed bylaws change regarding GAC advice Dear all When we discussed this document at WP1 last week, there was a general view that this was worth doing and there were no objections raised. We did think it needed to be discussed in the whole CCWG as it overlaps the work of WP1 and 2. My apologies for being slow to communicate this to the whole CCWG. I await the co-chairs' advice about when we will schedule that in the agenda. best, Jordan On 1 April 2015 at 15:30, Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org>> wrote: To: members of Work Party 1, Work Party 2, and the stress test WP While in Istanbul, the stress test WP had hoped to discuss appropriate responses to stress test 18, regarding GAC advice that might no longer be supported by consensus. We didn’t get to this in Istanbul, so I drafted a summary of previous discussions of ST 18, and a proposed a way forward (page 5). It’s now for WP1 and WP2 to discuss mechanisms/powers to respond to the stress test. I ran this draft by the CCWG co-chairs, who advised several key edits and agreed this was an issue we need to address, despite the political sensitivities. I cannot join the WP1 call on 1-April, but hope this document is sufficient for you to consider the proposed bylaws change. Best, Steve — Steve DelBianco Executive Director NetChoice http://www.NetChoice.org<http://www.netchoice.org/> and http://blog.netchoice.org<http://blog.netchoice.org/> +1.703.615.6206<tel:%2B1.703.615.6206> -- Jordan Carter Chief Executive InternetNZ 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649<tel:%2B64%2021%20442%20649> (mob) jordan@internetnz.net.nz<mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz> Skype: jordancarter A better world through a better Internet _______________________________________________ WP1 mailing list WP1@icann.org<mailto:WP1@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1 _______________________________________________ WP1 mailing list WP1@icann.org<mailto:WP1@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1