At 02/02/2016 02:30 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
Hello,
Thanks for the share, did a quick read and have a few general comments/question:
1. Isn't there a way to have the CSC charter separate and not incorporated into the bylaw as the bylaw is looking quite bulky. That said, I note that it's referred to as Annex D so I assume that is perhaps the only reference that would exist in the bylaw?
Agree.
2. I believe any change in the CSC charter should involved other chartering SO/AC not just be based on the ccNSO and GNSO decision.
This is moot if the Charter is a Bylaw. But if it is not, there should be involvement of others as there was in the creation of the original.
3. The CCWG proposed process to approve update of any text in the bylaw (including CSC charter) should be applied. So I think the charter update(depending on whether this will be standard or fundamental bylaw) should be subject to board approval.
If it is in a Bylaw, there is no choice but to follow the standard Bylaw change process.
4. Some of the decision making does not recognise other community like ALAC as part of the decision makers. For instance the decision process for SCWG.
Seun, could you be specific in the reference? The references to the SCWG in particular seem to acknowledge involvement of a Community Mechanism (it ALSO needs ccNSO/GNSO approval)
5. Could it be indicated which of the texts goes to fundamental bylaw and which one to standard?
Regards On 2 Feb 2016 6:21 p.m., "Jonathan Robinson" <<mailto:jrobinson@afilias.info>jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:
All,
A couple of updates since our previous meeting and ahead of our meeting on Thursday Feb 4 @ 16h00 UTC.
We are waiting for the final wording from CWG Accountability in relation to our requirements on IANA Budget and IRP but now expect that these will be satisfactorily dealt with.
As per Graceâs note on the CCWG agenda for their meeting today, these matters were subject to âfinal readingâ by the CCWG today.
On the series of questions presented by Sidley in preparation for drafting the proposed ICANN Bylaws to deal with the work of the CWG Stewardship, Graceâs email of Jan 25 sought further input from our group.
Essentially we have:
a. Input from relevant DT leads (Thank-you!)
b. Input from staff
c. Remaining open questions
Any input to point c above will be helpful.
The plan (as per our last meeting and captured in Graceâs email of Jan 25) was to review and provide input so that responses can be provided to Sidley after the Feb 4 Call.
This work to be done via the mailing list by using the âtrack changesâ feature in Word. Staff will monitor the list and manage version control if needed.
If there are outstanding issues, or disagreement on a response, this can be discussed further at the next meeting.
If you are able to review the document (re-attached for convenience) and provide any input over the next 24 hours or so, that will be very helpful.
Thank-you,
Jonathan & Lise
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list <mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org>CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship