<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"></head>
<body>
I didn't check the other groups but the ALAC was not correct. Hopefully
next go around.<br><br>
Alan<br><br>
At 2020-07-30 06:53 AM, Justine Chew wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" class="cite" cite="">I have just seen an updated
Chairs Consensus Designation Table as at 30 July. Would that be an
accurate summation, in your opinion?<br><br>
Thanks,<br>
Justine<br>
<font face="arial">------</font><br><br>
<br>
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 12:09, Alan Greenberg
<<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>
> wrote:<br>
<dl>
<dd>Of the 9 groups on the EPDP, 7 have now either issued statements or
<br>
<dd>given their level of consensus on the report. Not yet seen are the
<br>
<dd>NCSG or the ISPCP. But the initial consensus level issue by the <br>
<dd>acting Chair who happens to be an NCSG member may indicate their
<br>
<dd>level of support. Note that the Chair's assessment came out BEFORE
<br>
<dd>any of the other groups spoke up - it was his best estimate.<br><br>
<dd>They make VERY interesting reading, and I strongly suggest that, at
<br>
<dd>least for current ALAC members, you read them all.<br><br>
<dd>I am still expecting a GAC and SSAC statement, but it make take a bit
<br>
<dd>of time. No idea whether NCSG or ISPCP will submit one.<br><br>
<dd>As expected, those with significant business interests (and paid
<br>
<dd>participation!) have made the strongest and most detailed
statements.<br><br>
<dd>I note that the level of consensus on some recommendation will be
<br>
<dd>interesting. There are 7 groups on the EPDP and it looks like 4 or 5
<br>
<dd>may not support certain recommendations. It is not clear how the
<br>
<dd>rating of the groups will impact consensus. My understanding is that
<br>
<dd>all groups should be given equal weight, so 4 or 5 out of 9 would be
<br>
<dd>DIVERGENCE (see the definitions of Consensus at the end of the <br>
<dd>Chair's document).<br><br>
<dd>On the other hand, the NCSG has repeatedly argued that for the groups
<br>
<dd>within the GNSO, they must be weighted based on their votes in the
<br>
<dd>GNSO Council (not quite but basically NCSG = Ry = Rr = (IPC+BC+ISPC))
<br>
<dd>and they have never said how the ACs would be factored into
that.<br><br>
<dd>In the past, the GNSO Council has tended to approve recommendations
<br>
<dd>with Full Consensus or Consensus. I don't think they have accepted
<br>
<dd>recommendation with "Strong Support but Significant
Opposition" and <br>
<dd>certainly not "Divergence". Perhaps Cheryl can
confirm.<br><br>
<dd>As other things come in, I will forward them.<br><br>
<dd>What we must decide is whether any of this makes us want to either
<br>
<dd>revise our statement or add an addendum. My initial inclination is to
<br>
<dd>go the addendum route.<br><br>
<dd>Alan_______________________________________________<br>
<dd>ALAC mailing list<br>
<dd><a href="mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org">
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br>
<dd>
<a href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac" eudora="autourl">
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac</a><br><br>
<dd>At-Large Online:
<a href="http://www.atlarge.icann.org">http://www.atlarge.icann.org</a>
<br>
<dd>ALAC Working Wiki:
<a href="https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)">
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)</a>
<br>
<dd>_______________________________________________<br>
<dd>By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of
your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list
accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
(<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy">
https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of
Service
(<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos">
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link
above to change your membership status or configuration, including
unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery
altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.<br>
</dl></blockquote></body>
</html>