Hi,

I do not understand the need for it and what it achieves.

Are we talking about the plan that have not been rolled out for review
yet?  How can we be asking for more time on something they have not
asked us to review yet.

As I understand it they gave the Leaders a peek, and some of you passed
that peek on.  I am not sure what else is going on.  Are they waiting
for reviews?  Will they honor reviews?  Or is really a done deal that
are 'agree or left behind deals'? Will we just be adding yet another
comment to be ignored - we can see the effect the previous letter had.

I also think it is heartwarming that all you leaders have found such
kumbaya among yourselves for rapid creation of letters the rest of us
barely have time to approve.  I would prefer to see a Council channel
used for these sorts of things.

i am not in favor of the note.

avri

On 08-Aug-14 04:42, William Drake wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Further to the discussion about staff’s proposed accountability
> mechanism, SG/constituency chairs have been discussing a possible joint
> statement. As agreeing on details regarding specific concerns might take
> some cycles and Fadi’s asked us to move quickly into alignment, Tony
> Holmes of the ISPCP has circulated this place holder for collective
> endorsement and rapid transmission.  Would people be amenable to NCSG
> signing onto this for now, with more to come?  Bill
> 
> /During ICANN meeting 50 the entire GNSO community came together to make
> a statement calling for the Board to support community creation of an
> independent accountability mechanism. That action clearly indicates the
> importance of this issue to the community and its constituent groups.
> Since then we have closely followed this issue and are now
> considering //ICANN’s proposal for managing the accountability process.
> However at this stage it would be both prudent and timely to advise you
> that currently there is no alignment within the GNSO community on the
> proposed approach or process proposed by ICANN. Discussions are on-going
> and it is our intention to offer a more detailed statement of our
> concerns as early as possible next week./
> /
> /
> Bill
> 
> ***********************************************
> William J. Drake
> International Fellow & Lecturer
>   Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
>   University of Zurich, Switzerland
> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, 
>   ICANN, www.ncuc.org <http://www.ncuc.org>
> [log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> (direct), [log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> (lists),
>   www.williamdrake.org <http://www.williamdrake.org>
> ***********************************************
>