Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CCWG ACCT Stress Test WP Meeting #8 - 10 June will be available here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=53778752 A copy of the notes and action items may be found below. Thank you Best regards, Kim ACTION Items ACTION ITEM - Agenda 21 The legislative power of where you are incorporated and where staff person is based are different. Board would have to decide how to respond. The community has role of developing policies and we have ability to challenge. Stress test asks how community has accountability in how it solves problem. Notes NOTES & ACTION ITEMS: These high-level notes are designed to help you navigate through content of the call and do not substitute in any way the transcript. Suggestion made to Congress that they require NTIA to certify that Bylaws changes have been adopted. Discussion of the DOTCOM act. What time frame can we expect for implementation of the bill? The appropriations rider on spending is a different committee. The alternative might have been a GAO review of the CCWG proposals, which could have taken a year or more, so the DOTCOM act seems to present a more favorable option. Will this raise issues of jurisdiction? Are there any additional stress test scenarios based on the politics of the U.S. /The Hill? Probably not. Goal is simplification. ST call suggested work for the call: Review last week's call. Review the public comment input to the CCWG, relevant to stress tests. 1 action items: stress test for the FIFA scandal. Felt we had a test (9) that covered that, para 445 the remedy. Mathieu: perception that not only corruption, but many embers involved by re-electing he same officers. How do we prevent the corrupt insider? Suggest asking Mathieu in BA if he wants test number 9 added to. But right need more than that as he is going to the next level of how to address capture at the volunteer level Not the risk that capture can happen from the inside. And note that we will be recommending bylaws changes that will affect the SO/AC. We can recommend more transparency and stricter bylaws. Rogue voting: within the UA. Might be a way for the SO/AC to notify that some rogue vote had occurred and that a hold be put on that vote. And will develop a stress test on this. Pages from the public comment review tool have been sent by staff. Should we review at some point, and how do we best react to those comments? Present a scenario and then some fleshed out columns. What approach? R Hill example. Some confusion over jurisdiction and location of incorporation. Are they prior constraints or improperly used. CA or the US being able to create law that effects what you do has long been a concern, but it would be the case for any location. And is the reason people have suggested a host country agreement. So describe the distinction Should the stress test team do a deep dive on the pro and cons of Swiss jurisdiction? How do we respond? Can point out the distinction between jurisdiction and incorporation. Under any jurisdiction, how does the community power become implementable? Or ask him or legal what a response might be? We focus stress tests on adequacy of measures. ACTION ITEM - Agenda 21 The legislative power of where you are incorporated and where staff person is based are different. Board would have to decide how to respond. The community has role of developing policies and we have ability to challenge. Stress test asks how community has accountability in how it solves problem. Wednesday, 17 June call is cancelled. Next meeting will be held on Wednesday, 1 July.