<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi<div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class="">On Aug 30, 2015, at 9:10 PM, Mueller, Milton L <<a href="mailto:milton.mueller@PUBPOLICY.GATECH.EDU" class="">milton.mueller@PUBPOLICY.GATECH.EDU</a>> wrote:</blockquote><blockquote type="cite" class=""><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;">Two things to avoid like the plague: <o:p class=""></o:p></div><div class="" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span class="">1)<span class="" style="font-size: 7pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span>Giving GAC BOTH privileged advisory status AND participation in the community mechanism<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div class="" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span class="">2)<span class="" style="font-size: 7pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span>Giving GAC a similar privileged advisory status over the community mechanism (e.g., GAC would not participate directly but would “advise” the empowered community, which would translate into an effective veto, delay or dilution of the community’s powers).<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div class="" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div class="" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;">Well, it seems unlikely that the special advisory power would be taken away. </div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>To put it mildly</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;">So if we don’t oppose their inclusion in the community mechanism, there is a risk that they will get both. </div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>Sounds right</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;">Indeed, it seems highly likely to me that many members of GAC will respond to the CCWG dilemma by demanding option 1) or 2). Still not sure how to play this.</div></blockquote><br class=""></div></div><div>At the ICANN Studienkreis meeting it seemed clear that not changing the existing balance of power is viewed as essential to avoiding ‘destabilization’, the red line framing de jour. So maybe adopt that as a framing and deploy it to our ends?</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Bill</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>