At 10:50 AM 5/25/2016, avri doria wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On 25-May-16 10:40, David Post wrote:
> > but it has the very significant advantage that it is not irrevocable.
>
>A note on this.  Nothing in the changes is irrevocable.  While the
>process for changing may vary from relatively east to quite complicated,
>none of it is rocket science and all of of it can be tweaked with
>community non-objection/approval if/when gaps or other faults are found.

Well, yes and no.  I don't think we know how "community 
non-objection/approval" will actually work, in practice, on the 
ground. How the rules regarding Board selection, the voting 
requirements for Board action, the manner in which the community (and 
the GAC) can propose changes to ICANN policy or to the Bylaws, the 
degree of support required to implement those changes, the degree of 
discretion the Board will have with respect to those decisions, the 
extent to which the IRP effectively constrains the Board, ...  will 
interact to accomplish what they've been designed to accomplish, i.e. 
to ensure that ICANN cannot be captured by a single interest.  So yes 
- if it works as designed, the transition's not "irrevocable.  But if 
the constraints on the Board, and those community 
non-objection/approval mechanisms, turn out to be not nearly as 
effective in actual practice as everyone thinks they will be, then in 
effect it is .

David



>avri
>
>---
>This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>https://www.avast.com/antivirus

*******************************
David G. Post
Volokh Conspiracy Blog http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post
Book (ISO Jefferson's Moose)  http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n
Music https://soundcloud.com/davidpost-1/sets
Publications & Misc. http://www.ssrn.com/author=537  http://www.davidpost.com
*******************************