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
*******************************