Mathieu Sorry I am not in favour of interpretation. What one interprete in one direction could be differently interpreted by other in other direction Pls retrain the Charter text as it is If that was vague , pls redress the charter but not interpret it in the way that suits certain area or certain persons Kavouss 2015-01-15 12:41 GMT+01:00 Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>:

Dear Tijani,

The "new" proposal is in no way meant to be a substitute to the charter definition. The Charter definition, intentionally, left room for interpretation. Therefore the proposal we are now considering intends to provide the CCWG's interpretation and orientation.

Indeed, we are delivering on one of the areas of work mentioned in our Charter, which read (section III, deliverables) :

· A definition/description of what differentiates a Work Stream 1 issue from a Work Stream 2 issue

Thus, the question is whether the proposed version is found appropriate to the group in order to qualify what is necessary before the transition happens.

I hope this clarifies.

Best Mathieu

Le 15/01/2015 10:52, Tijani BEN JEMAA a écrit :

Dear all,

I read again the new proposed definition of the Work Streams, and I found it too different from the one in our charter:

In the charter:

· *Work Stream 1*: focused on mechanisms enhancing ICANN accountability that must be in place or committed to within the time frame of the IANA Stewardship Transition;

· *Work Stream 2*: focused on addressing accountability topics for which a timeline for developing solutions and full implementation may extend beyond the IANA Stewardship Transition

The new proposal:

· *Work Stream 1* mechanisms are those that, when in place or committed to, would provide the community with confidence that any accountability mechanism that would further enhance ICANN's accountability would be implemented if it had consensus support from the community, even if it were to encounter ICANN management resistance or if it were against the interest of ICANN as a corporate entity.

· All other consensus items could be in *Work Stream 2*, provided there are mechanisms in WS1 adequate to force implementation of WS2 items despite resistance from ICANN management and board.

I don’t believe that we are allowed to change any part of the charter without going back to the chartering organizations and ask for their approval.

On the other hand, the separation of WS 1 and WS 2 was for the purpose of having the accountability mechanisms necessary before the transition done in time, and the new definition doesn’t satisfy this requirement

I would prefer stay with the charter definition for all those reasons

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Tijani BEN JEMAA*

Executive Director

Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*)

Phone: + 216 41 649 605

Mobile: + 216 98 330 114

Fax: + 216 70 853 376

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------ <http://www.avast.com/>

Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant parce que la protection Antivirus avast! <http://www.avast.com/> est active.

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

-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06mathieu.weill@afnic.fr Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************

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