Versions Compared

Old Version 10

changes.mady.by.user Kimberly Carlson

Saved on

compared with

New Version 11

changes.mady.by.user Kimberly Carlson

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

4. AOB

5. Closing Remarks

Notes

1. Welcome Remarks (Roll call, SOI)

Greg on audio only

  • Action (staff): Provide information on the Statement of Interest

2. Sections to Review

Power: Removal of Board members (WP1)

  • Paragraph 11 (pg 2-3): community standards to guide Board members. There was support on WP1 to remove the community standards from the text. Intention of paragraph 11 is not impose any restrictions on the powers of Board members.
  •  Action: reiew the wording of paragraph 11, possibly to remove the part of the sentence "and the expectations which..."
  • Action: Clarify 6c 
  • Action: Restructure document with paragraph 6 repeated separately after current paragraphs 4 and 5, in order to reduce any confusion

 Power: Board Recall (WP1)

Counsel did a review of this document and provided more detail

  • Action: make language more explicit for NomCom and diversity requirements
  • Action: (Steve and Chairs): capture needs to be addressed in Stress Tests (with regard to caretaker Board)
  • Action: (WP1): make sure that liaisons are unaffected (by the removal). Advice from Sidley: Technically liaisons are not "members" of board or "directors"; they are persons that regularly participate in a non-voting capacity in board meetings
  • Action: (WP1) to consider the petitioning requirements and clarify these
  • Action: revise language to make sure that ALAC is not given special rights
  • Action: add the word "simple" to majority in first bullet in paragraph 2
  • Action: Cheryl to confirm discussion in Paris with regard to NomCom

Power: Budget (WP1)

  • This document needs a rewrite
  • Have not yet resolved issue on IANA budget veto with CWG
  • Any objection to treating the IANA and ICANN budgets separately with regards to the veto process? No objection noted.
  • Does the group agree to an infinite number of vetoes? Sebastien Bachollet registered an objection.
  • Time for reviewing the budget: is 15 days enough? Kavouss Arasteh suggests 15 additional calendar days
  • Board to come back with proposition: is 15 days enough?

Community Mechanism (WP1)

  • No decisions are made in the [Assembly/Forum].
  • The [Assembly/Forum] brings the community together to discuss issues before decisions are made and votes are taken
  • Red ticks for objections to the term "Assembly": 1 from Samantha
  • Red ticks for objections to the term "Forum": 3 from Alan, Sebastien, Lyman

Mission, Commitments, and Core Values (WP2)

  • Avri registered that she will file a minority report on the human rights issue.
  • Action: revise text to clarify CCWG position on Human rights. Human rights have been part of this group's deliberation. CCWG is willing to work on this and will not put the issue on the back-burner. The reference on international law is understood to be a reference to human rights as well (indirect). We are working on changes to ICANN's paperwork (there is currently no reference to human rights)
  • Do you agree to explicitly mention human rights in the bylaws at this stage? Green ticks: 6 // Red ticks: 9 // Abstain: 6
  •  --> there is no enough support at this stage to include Human Rights in the Bylaws

5. Closing Remarks

thank you and talk to you Tuesday

Action Items

Documents Presented

...