Re: [council] Proposed Edit to Council Letter to CCWG-ACCT

[Johan Helsingius <julf@xxxxxxxx>]

Keith,

> As we discuss Recommendation 11, everyone should remember that
> the 2/3 threshold (an increase of two Board votes) was a tradeoff
> for getting the GAC consensus definition incorporated into the
> bylaws.

Thanks for that reminder - it goes to the core of my issue with
recommendations 1, 10 and 11. It appears as if (and I hope I am
wrong) that the GAC is using the ICANN transition as an opportunity
to increase its power and influence in ICANN. To me, such a situation
doesn't serve the best interests of the Internet community as a
whole, and I don't think we should accept it just because we don't
want to be the ones to jeopardize the transition. I think we should
strive for a suitable balance that works for all parties involved
and ensures a multistakeholder future without risk of either
external or internal capture.

That is of course only my own, personal (and probably naive)
opinion.

        Julf