[council] Fwd: [CCWG-ACCT] A message from the Co-Chairs

[Phil Corwin <psc@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Fellow Councilors:

We probably should consider the effect of this unfortunate delay in the release 
of the Final Report, until next Wednesday at the earliest, upon our ability to 
responsibly review it within the current timeline from here through Marrakech.

Best, Philip

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004
202-559-8597/Direct
202-559-8750/Fax
202-255-6172/Cell

Twitter: @VLawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

From: León Felipe Sánchez Ambía 
<leonfelipe@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:leonfelipe@xxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: February 19, 2016 at 7:19:15 PM EST
To: Accountability Cross Community 
<accountability-cross-community@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:accountability-cross-community@xxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: "ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:acct-staff@xxxxxxxxx>)" 
<acct-staff@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:acct-staff@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] A message from the Co-Chairs

Dear all,

As you are aware, we intended to publish our Final Report today (19 February 
2016) for Chartering Organization consideration. We are ready to do so, except 
for one issue where we would like to consider options as a full group.
There is, still, ongoing discussion on the issue of thresholds for Board 
removal in Recommendation #2, which raised concerns in our report after we came 
to a compromise on Board consideration of GAC Advice (Recommendation #11). 
Since then, we have tried to propose compromise text that would be acceptable 
by different groups (c.f. the 12 February and 17 February drafts, posted at 
https://community.icann.org/x/iw2AAw).
We received comments on this issue, and in some cases, minority statements, 
from members and participants in the ALAC, GAC, GNSO, and the Board. Earlier 
today, ICANN Chairman, Steve Crocker, posted a note, apparently on behalf of 
the Icann Board, outlining Board concerns with the latest attempt at compromise 
text proposed on 17 February: 
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/2016-February/011056.html.
While these last minute interventions are deeply disappointing for those of us 
who worked extremely hard, within the group and within their respective 
communities, to build bridges and promote compromise, our main target and duty 
remains to achieve a stable level of consensus, respecting the bottom-up, 
multistakeholder nature of the process.
It is fortunate that the Board provided this input before we published the 
report, since it enables us to assess the potential consequences of a Board 
disagreement later in the process.
We believe this issue must be discussed before sending our Final Report to 
Chartering Organizations. At the very least, we would like the opportunity to 
discuss a way forward and process as full group on next Tuesday’s 
CCWG-Accountability call at 06:00 UTC. There are many options and directions 
the group can take at this stage, each with different implications and 
considerations, and these options should be discussed as a group.
Until the Tuesday call, let’s keep open channels of communication on our 
mailing list and work towards a solution. We will also reach out to the 
Chartering Organizations to inform them of the change in our schedule.
As co-chairs, we renew our call upon every Member, upon every Participant, our 
call upon community leaders especially in the ICANN Board, in the GNSO and in 
the GAC to step away from confronting each other, to engage constructively and 
recognize each other’s value to the multistakeholder model. If you believe that 
the multistakeholder model can deliver, now is the time to act accordingly.
 Thank you,

Thomas, León, Mathieu
CCWG-Accountability Co-Chairs


_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@xxxxxxxxx>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community