At the risk of stirring the pot, I want to ask the community whether or not the accountability proposal has been so watered down that the NCSG ought to oppose it outright and, concurrently, seek agreement from the Commercial users such that the gNSO was opposed to the transition in its current form.  If I were to tally the reasons to oppose the current draft they would include:
 
·        Enhanced GAC role through the 2/3 vote rule and there membership in the Empowered Community
·        Incomplete rights of inspection
·        Continued board opposition to human rights and mission statement as drafted
·        Process fouls in any number of ways, most recently in the overly short 21-day comment period on what the Co-Chairs say is the “final report”
·        Enhanced role of ACs in the empowered community to the detriment of the SOs where policy actually resides (this is above and beyond the GAC issue already noted)
 
I could go on, but frankly, for myself, the proposal seems to have fallen sufficiently short that I would probably “vote” no, if votes were being counted.  It seems to me that someone needs to say that out loud ….
 
Paul
 
Paul Rosenzweig
Red Branch Consulting, PLLC
509 C St. NE
Washington, DC 20002
[log in to unmask]
O: +1 (202) 547-0660
M: +1 (202) 329-9650
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066
www.redbranchconsulting.com
www.paulrosenzweigesq.com
Link to my PGP Key