Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 8 May 2014 09:37:36 +0100 |
Content-Type: | multipart/alternative |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hello Milton,
I think it was clearly stated that they are inter-related and i don't think
there is any need to request discussing relationships at this time. What is
think is more important is for the accountability process to pass through
the community process. I propose the following edit.
On May 7 ICANN announced a separate process to enhance ICANN
accountability. [1] However, we will like to note that the outcome of the
ICANN accountability will highly determine/improve on the outcome of the
IANA transitioning process. It is therefore important that the ICANN
accountability outcome is developed by the community in a transparent and
inclusive manner.
Kind Regards
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 8:32 PM, Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> We have amended the NCSG statement on the IANA transition to reflect
> ICANN’s announcement today.
>
> We have replaced the following language:
>
>
>
> Recent comments by ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé suggest that a distinct process
> to develop a proposal to improve accountability of ICANN will be launched.
> However, at this time no process has been announced by ICANN, nor has the
> relationship of that process to the IANA transition process been clarified.
>
>
>
> With:
>
>
>
> On May 7 ICANN announced a separate process to enhance ICANN
> accountability. [1] However, the relationship of that process to the IANA
> transition must be clarified and agreed upon by stakeholders.
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>[log in to unmask]
<[log in to unmask]>*
The key to understanding is humility - my view !
|
|
|