Dear All, With apology, Pls read the message to you by me VOID and INVALID A major reading mistake occurred Appology for that Kavouss 2016-05-26 9:37 GMT+02:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>:

Dear All, On 25 May 2016 in regard with Bylaws Finalization a two pages doc. was received. Under Section 3 of this doc. NTIA proposed the following Qoute

1. *The GAC Changes from INTA *

INTA Recommended the following changes to the GAC-related Bylaws:

12.2(a)(x) ... “*may** only be rejected by a vote of no less than 60% of the Board.*” 12.2(a)(xi) "*If GAC Consensus Advice is rejected by the Board pursuant to Section 12.2(a)(x) and If no such mutually acceptable solution can be found, the Board will state in its final decision*..."

Unquote Dear Colleagues in GAC. This is a totally unacceptable proposal. It totally undermines the very basic principle of GAC Advice. If such drastic and negative proposal is seriously considered, I propose the following 1. Go back to 50% rejections threshold to not accept GAC Advice 2. Suppress the " GAC Carve-Out " totally 3. Suppress Recommendation 11 on Stress Test 18 Modify the Bylaws according ly Regards

2016-05-26 9:25 GMT+02:00 <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch>:

...

Dear Mathieu

Thanks for this info – as to the draft amended Articles of Incorporation: could you or ICANN Staff inform us about the process and timeline that will be followed to proceed with such amendments?

Thanks and regards

Jorge

*Von:* accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] *Im Auftrag von *Mathieu Weill *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 26. Mai 2016 08:47 *An:* accountability-cross-community@icann.org *Betreff:* [CCWG-ACCT] TR: [bylaws-coord] For Review - Summary and Analysis of Public Comment and proposed revised ICANN Bylaws

FYI.

Also worth noting that a Bylaws drafting coordination group call is scheduled at 19 UTC today.

Best

Mathieu

*De :* bylaws-coord-bounces@icann.org [ mailto:bylaws-coord-bounces@icann.org <bylaws-coord-bounces@icann.org>] *De la part de* Samantha Eisner *Envoyé :* jeudi 26 mai 2016 03:51 *À :* bylaws-coord@icann.org; icann-board@icann.org *Cc :* Amy Stathos *Objet :* [bylaws-coord] For Review - Summary and Analysis of Public Comment and proposed revised ICANN Bylaws

Dear ICANN Board and Bylaws Coordination Group,

Attached please find the following documents

1. The Summary Report of Public Comments 2. A Detailed Chart of ICANN’s Analysis of the Comments (in support of the Summary) 3. A clean version of the proposed New Bylaws, revised to address the comments 4. A redline of the Bylaws, showing the changes from the 20 April version posted for comment 5. A short memo to the BCG noting a few items for consideration

I am also including for your review a CLEAN and REDLINE version of the proposed Restated Articles of Incorporation, which has been agreed amongst ICANN and Sidley and Adler.

The Report and proposed Bylaws will be posted on the ICANN Public Comment page shortly.

Please let us know if you have further questions. We look forward to speaking with you tomorrow.

Sam Eisner

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

Dear Nigel, Tks for your views I have withdrawn the comments made as it was made unduly as results of wrong reading of the text. Sorry for that Regards 2016-05-26 10:16 GMT+02:00 Nigel Roberts <nigel@channelisles.net>:

Dear Kavouss

You have a 100% perfect right to find parts of the new By-Laws unacceptable, and I should defend to the death your right to say so; however you are, it seems to me, now tilting at windmills at this late stage. (I find the restriction of ICANN's committment to human rights to 'applicable law' (of which there is none) to be equally unacceptable.)

However, it is what it is.

The train has left the station. Elvis has left the building.

If you could suggest any procedural method about which 'unacceptable' parts of the proposed Draft Bylaws could be objected to and changed at this phase in their adoption, I would be delighted to hear it.

On the other hand, perhaps we should just take whatever gains we have made to dayte, and carry on the good work within WS2??

Nigel

On 26/05/16 08:37, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:

This is a totally unacceptable proposal.

...

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community