Fundamental Bylaws

Additional question:

The CCWG-Accountability welcomes feedback on whether there is a need, as part of Work Stream 1 (pre-Transition), to provide for any other means for other parts of the ICANNsystem to be able to propose new Fundamental Bylaws or changes to existing ones. In particular, the CCWG-Accountability welcomes feedback on whether the Mission should be subject to even higher thresholds of Board or community assent.

Mechanism to empower the Community

Additional questions:

Do you agree that the introduction of a community mechanism to empower the community over certain Board decisions would enhance ICANN's accountability?
What guidance, if any, would you provide to the CCWG-Accountability regarding the proposed options? Please provide the underlying rationale in terms of required accountability features or protection against certain contingencies.

I believe that although not directly mentioned in the draft you put together, for obvious reasons, You do address the questions in the different comments you make in the body of the document.

Best regards,

León

El 01/06/2015, a las 23:28, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> escribió:

TA revised version of the Comment has been posted incorporating the issues raised in the last day. See https://community.icann.org/x/koU0Aw.

Note that there is a conflict between this statement and that submitted by AFRALO. I have asked for clarification on whether the text in the Draft ALAC comments suffices to address the issues raised by AFRALO but there has not been a reply as yet.

Alan<ALAC-Comment-v06.pdf>_______________________________________________
Iana-issues mailing list
Iana-issues@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/iana-issues