Dear All, Once again I request you to consider my amendments In particular, Quorum : 2/3 instead of 1/2 DECISION MAKING : By consensus and under purely exceptional cases , by 2/3 of those ICG MEM,BERS present at the meeting, or by remote voting Other issue raised in my drafty Regards Kavouss 2014-09-02 15:18 GMT+02:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>:
Dear All, Thank you very much for V5 Draft Still many of my suggestions were not taken into account e.g. ICG is expected ... where as I clearly mentioned that we should not talk about or refer to expectation rather talk about or refer to what should be done either mandatory " shall " or morally mandatory " should " or between the two " needs to " Quorums What is the criteria used ," at least one member from each communities" what are these communities quantitatively We should always talk about number ( s) I suggested at least 2/3 or 4/5 BUT CERTAINLY NOT 1/2since it is totally in appropriate that for such a delicate ,sensitive issue 14 out of 30 disagree and still we take the decision is valid. Please look at all international law decision making process 2/3 is the minimum
There are other examples that my points were not taken into account Please kindly reconsider the matter and carefully examine them and proceed Regards Kavouss
2014-09-02 15:16 GMT+02:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>:
Dear All,
Thank you very much for V5 Draft Still many of my suggestions were not taken into account e.g. ICG is expected ... where as I clearly mentioned that we should not talk about or refer to expectation rather talk about or refer to what should be done either mandatory " shall " or morally mandatory " should " or between the two " needs to " Quorums What is the criteria used ," at least one member from each communities" what are these communities quantitatively We should always talk about number ( s) I suggested at least 2/3 or 4/5 BUT CERTAINLY NOT 1/2since it is totally in appropriate that for such a delicate ,sensitive issue 14 out of 30 disagree and still we take the decision is valid. Please look at all international law decision making process 2/3 is the minimum
There are other examples that my points were not taken into account Please kindly reconsider the matter and carefully examine them and proceed Regards Kavouss
2014-09-02 0:19 GMT+02:00 WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de>:
All,
attached is draft version v5 of the consensus building document which I’ve also uploaded to the dropbox.
In addition I send you the “ICG-Consensus Building_draft_v4 + MB (1),KA V3JHA” with all latest revisions and comments from your side (I hope I’m right). I have inserted my comments to yours as well as proposals on how to proceed. ICG-Consensus Building_draft_v5 is the result of this exercise:
- it is explained that ICANN Board Liaison and ICANN Staff Laison Expert are not taking part in the decision making - “participants” replaced by “members” - quorum for decision making is defined as: A quorum is a majority of ICG members and must include at least one member of each ICG community ( https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/coordination-group-2014-06-17-en; 16 or more). This would cover Martins respective comment. If required something could be included in case of unintended absence. - re 4.a Personnel Decisions: in the second para. I suggest to lift the voting threshold to the level of the quorum as defined. Otherwise a voting with 9 affirmative votes may succeed which seems to be unbalanced. - “small minority”: should further be discussed. I added the condition that a recommendation is not reached if at least one of the ICG communities (according to the list) as a whole is firmly and formally opposed. That would mean a formal written objection by the community leadership on behalf of their community. - minority views – if any – should be expressed in the report (maybe as an annex) - chair / (and/or) vicechairs: I think the respective roles, proxies etc. should be added to the “chair responsibility” document. Then here in the consensus building document reference is only made to the chair.
Please provide your comments with the “comment” function in order to make it easier to manage.
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg