Hi Eberhard, To recap what was said in the meeting (sorry if I slightly distort): - Mike Silber asked whether our group had considered the queston of what Board we want - Thomas and I responded 1) that our Charter did not specifically include reviewing the way the Board functioned 2) that we had to consider the possibility of the Board dysfunctioning in the future. - Jonathan clarified it later in a much better way than we did (but I can't exactly remember how). Eberhard, you are obviously holding us accountable to what we said. Fair enough. I see two ways this was addressed in our group so far :- - through the Charter, which mentions our scope and goals - in our F2F in Frankfurt : Sébastien Bachollet mentioned "enhance the way the Board and SO/AC are working" in the mindmap discussion. This item was not flagged as WS1. Hope this clarifies. Best Mathieu Le 08/02/2015 12:03, Dr Eberhard W Lisse a écrit :

Dear Co-Chairs,

I am somewhat confused by the response by Thomas Rickert and Mathieu Weill 9and in particular Johnathan Zuck's remarks) to Mike Silber's question what type of Board we want (in the context of the CCWG-Accountability).

Can you please point me to the the notes where we have discussed this? I have missed 2 calls, could have been then. Otherwise I only recall that I have mentioned this very issue in the context of adding additional layers of bureaucracy instead of fixing the Bord.

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

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