[NCSG-PC] Proposed comments on BGC Changes - new link
Stephanie Perrin
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Thu May 11 04:43:21 EEST 2017
Thanks Rafik!
Stephanie
On 2017-05-10 21:38, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> Thanks all, with no objections raised here or at NCSG list and with
> support from Mathew, Ayden, Ed and myself, I submitted the NCSG
> comment (attached).
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2017-05-10 22:01 GMT+09:00 Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>>:
>
> Thanks for this reminder, Rafik. Noting that there has been no
> opposition expressed on the main Discuss list, I support the
> submission of this comment and extend my thanks to James and
> Matthew for drafting it.
>
> - Ayden
>
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] Proposed comments on BGC Changes - new link
>> Local Time: May 10, 2017 1:44 PM
>> UTC Time: May 10, 2017 12:44 PM
>> From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>> To: Matthew Shears <matthew at intpolicy.com
>> <mailto:matthew at intpolicy.com>>
>> ncsg-pc <ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> the deadline for submission is less than 12 hours. if there is no
>> objection by then, I think we can submit the comment. please
>> respond asap.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> 2017-05-10 13:03 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>> <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>:
>>
>> hi all,
>>
>> this a reminder to get the votes/endorsement for the statement.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>>
>> 2017-05-09 22:57 GMT+09:00 Rafik Dammak
>> <rafik.dammak at gmail.com <mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>>:
>>
>> Hi Matt,
>>
>> thanks for the amendments,
>> we need to endorse the comment within 24 hours. please,
>> all PC members share your thoughts and if you endorsing
>> or not the statement.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> 2017-05-09 18:36 GMT+09:00 Matthew Shears
>> <matthew at intpolicy.com <mailto:matthew at intpolicy.com>>:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Would be good if I included the right link:
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KPaILgBF3EhSGM2NmcyUlscuF77wDFxlgyOIebl1ZYo/edit?usp=sharing
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KPaILgBF3EhSGM2NmcyUlscuF77wDFxlgyOIebl1ZYo/edit?usp=sharing>
>>
>> Thanks to Ayden for noticing.
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>>
>> On 09/05/2017 09:39, Matthew Shears wrote:
>>
>> Hi all
>>
>> Based on the feedback I have substantially
>> redrafted and shortened our submission.
>>
>> Please edit in the doc.
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/a/thefactory21.com/document/d/1KPaILgBF3EhSGM2NmcyUlscuF77wDFxlgyOIebl1ZYo/edit?usp=sharing
>> <https://docs.google.com/a/thefactory21.com/document/d/1KPaILgBF3EhSGM2NmcyUlscuF77wDFxlgyOIebl1ZYo/edit?usp=sharing>
>>
>>
>> Deadline tomorrow Wed 10 23.59 UTC.
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>>
>> On 08/05/2017 18:13, avri doria wrote:
>>
>> observer view: sounds good
>>
>> not sure the last bullet is needed. the fact
>> that we are doing this
>> through the proper process is good as a test
>> but is that a reason for
>> doing it? but it seems ok to include it.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>>
>> On 08-May-17 10:25, Matthew Shears wrote:
>>
>> Thanks all for the comments.
>>
>> Given the discussion, I am wondering
>> whether or not we need to make a
>> submission on this (there is only one so
>> far - from AFNIC).
>>
>> If we feel we do, we could in a short
>> statement:
>>
>> * Endorse the proposal for the
>> creation of the Board Accountability
>> Mechanisms Committee (BAMC)
>> * Recognize the importance of and the
>> need to respect the process
>> for changing the fundamental bylaws
>> * State that the proposed change is a
>> useful and non-controversial
>> way to engage and trial the
>> associated accountability mechanisms
>>
>> What other points could be added?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 07/05/2017 07:58, David Cake wrote:
>>
>> We need to fully respect the process
>> for changing the fundamental bylaws.
>> I have absolutely no problem with the
>> proposed change to do so - and
>> actually, I think an uncontroversial
>> change like this is a good trial for
>> those processes.
>>
>> I agree with Milton that while change
>> is uncontroversial, it not only is it
>> a fundamental bylaw, it is part of
>> the accountability mechanisms, and we
>> should insist that accountability
>> mechanisms are changed only with due
>> community process.
>>
>> While I think in general we should
>> avoid micromanaging board internal
>> processes to this extent, and I
>> understand the reasoning behind
>> taking mention of a specific board
>> committee out of bylaws, in practice
>> the current wording is a very simple
>> and easy to understand change, and
>> wording that removed mention of a
>> specific committee would be more
>> complex and potentially more
>> ambiguous. If a committee was created
>> specifically for dealing with
>> Accountability processes, it's
>> unlikely any future changes would be
>> necessary (the board could
>> effectively recombine committees in
>> the future if it wished without a
>> bylaws change IMO).
>>
>> David
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>
>> On 6 May 2017, at 5:42 am, avri
>> doria <avri at APC.ORG
>> <mailto:avri at APC.ORG>> wrote:
>>
>> hi,
>>
>> Perhaps the problem is that we
>> need to change the fundamental
>> bylaws to
>> take deciding on board committees
>> out of the fundamental bylaws.
>>
>> but in any case, got to do
>> something about the bylaws.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05-May-17 15:23, Mueller,
>> Milton L wrote:
>>
>> Hi, Matt
>>
>> There is not, and should not
>> be, any way around this. The
>> problem is
>> not that ICANN needs a
>> fundamental bylaw change to
>> “create a new
>> committee,” it is that
>> Article 4 sec 3 of the
>> bylaws, which is
>> designated as “fundamental,”
>> specifically names the BGC as
>> the handler
>> of Reconsideration requests.
>> (““The Board has designated
>> the Board
>> Governance Committee to
>> review and consider any such
>> Reconsideration
>> Requests.”)
>>
>>
>>
>> Article 4 is also the home of
>> a lot of other
>> “Accountability and
>> Review” stuff that we
>> definitely do not want the
>> board messing with
>> without community approval.
>>
>>
>>
>> So the board needs approval
>> for this and should have to
>> do through
>> this exercise. But if the
>> board decides to create a new
>> “Committee to
>> organize birthday
>> celebrations” or a “Committee
>> to Honor Snapping
>> Turtles” I don’t think there
>> would be any problem.
>>
>> And going forward, I guess
>> ICANN legal and the rest of
>> us will be
>> mindful of future flexibility
>> when deciding where to put
>> things in the
>> bylaws.
>>
>>
>>
>> Dr. Milton L Mueller
>>
>> Professor, School of Public
>> Policy <http://spp.gatech.edu/>
>>
>> Georgia Institute of Technology
>>
>> Internet Governance Project
>>
>> http://internetgovernance.org/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> One issue that has been
>> raised is that it seems silly
>> to have to have
>> a fundamental bylaw change
>> for the Board to be able to
>> create a new
>> committee. It is not clear
>> that there is anyway around
>> this but would
>> love to hear otherwise.
>>
>> Looking forward to your comments.
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for
>> viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>> <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for
>> viruses by AVG.
>> http://www.avg.com
>>
>> --
>> Matthew Shears
>> matthew at intpolicy.com
>> <mailto:matthew at intpolicy.com>
>> +447712472987 <tel:%2B447712472987>
>> Skype:mshears
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>> <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>> <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthew Shears
>> matthew at intpolicy.com <mailto:matthew at intpolicy.com>
>> +447712472987 <tel:%2B447712472987>
>> Skype:mshears
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>> <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170510/8f1a523d/attachment.htm>
More information about the NCSG-PC
mailing list