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

["Paul McGrady \(Policy\)" <policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I?m concerned about waiving the document cut off if the ?last chance to
waive red flags? ethos remains.  I thought that would be a difficult ethos
to connect with in the first place, but as this drags out, it seems even
more arbitrary.  In other words, I?m for keeping the Feb 29th session, so
long as I am not told later that my stakeholders missed their window to
raise issues because they weren?t raised on the 29th.  

 

Best,

Paul

 

 

 

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of James M. Bladel
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 8:23 PM
To: GNSO Council List
Subject: [council] Re: [CCWG-ACCT] A message from the Co-Chairs

 

Colleagues -

 

Please see below.  The CCWG will not publish today, which is the document
cut-off for our Special Session on 29 FEB.

 

I?m open to proposals that we either (a) waive the document cut off for this
document, and proceed with the Special Session, or (b) cancel the Special
Session.  I tend to favor the first approach, but will defer to the
sentiment of the group on this.  Any thoughts from the Council on this?

 

On our call Thursday we noted that we would not want our first exposure to
the CCWG Report was in Marrakesh.  Today?s development makes this scenario
more likely.  In response, I think we should prepare to repurpose additional
sessions (potentially Sunday, Tuesday and Wednesday) in Morocco for this
work.  But we will have a clearer picture next week.

 

Stay tuned.

 

Thanks?

 

J.

 

 

From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxx> on behalf of León
Felipe Sánchez Ambía <leonfelipe@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, February 19, 2016 at 18:19 
To: Accountability Cross Community
<accountability-cross-community@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "ACCT-Staff (acct-staff@xxxxxxxxx)" <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/0
11056.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