[lac-discuss-en] Fwd: New Public Comment: Proposed Bylaws Changes Regarding Consideration of GAC Advice

Tue Aug 19 17:52:17 UTC 2014

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]

 Subject: Re: Fwd: New Public Comment: Proposed Bylaws Changes Regarding Consideration of GAC Advice 
 From: vanda at uol.com.br

 Dear 
 The Board normally can not go against a decision of the GAC. But a 
 rarely did and when 
 makes explaining to the public must do so expressly; but 
 internally on the board, you need only 
 simple one to make this decision get wet. 
 The proposed new â…” means placing the GAC at the same level 
 control of the GNSO. Because a policy 
 approved by the GNSO supermajority required two thirds of the Board for 
 stand against such a decision. See the statutes 
 Annex A, Section 9 (Bylaws) But has GNSO policy consultation 
 public, is built open to all stakeholders. The same is not true 
 with decisions of the GAC.

 Although any proposal internally GAC needs to be approved by 
 100% of the participating governments, have more recently seen 
 Governments have gone into fields that really does not concern them without 
 hear the community as a whole. As in many cases to get 
 against a new TLD because one or two governments and demanded it 
 other politely enter agreement. It is difficult to achieve 100%. 

 One can understand that doing well (explaining the 2-3) the Board 
 can stay freer to veto proposed controller without requiring 
 extensive and sometimes complex explanations. 

 I personally see this as a dangerous alternative. To me it is 
 preferable to remain as is, with the need for explanations, but 
 internally with a simple majority. 

 Hugs 
 Vanda Scartezini 
 Polo Consultores Associados 
 Av. Paulista 1159, 1004 cj 
 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil 
 Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 
 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 

 On 8/18/14, 22:45 &quot;Fatima Cambronero&quot; <fatimacambronero at gmail.com> wrote: 
 > Dear / os, 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > This issue has just been opened to comments ALAC. 
 > 
 > 
 > Please, if you will interest and comment from LACRALO 
 > Ask about us LACRALO ALAC representatives to vote for 
 > Certain way, take the opportunity to do so when the period of 
 > Comment 
 > Is open and has not been submitted to a vote at ALAC. Otherwise 
 > Becomes very difficult to fulfill the mandate of the region. 
 > 
 > 
 > This theme, very briefly (you can read the attachments) implies 
 > A change in ICANN's Bylaws as suggested by 
 > The 
 > ATRT1. 
 > 
 > 
 > Currently for the ICANN Board to depart from a recommendation 
 > By the GAC should make this decision with a simple majority 
 > (50% + 1), as well as explaining why you are doing it.
 > 
 > The proposed amendment implies that approved them, now 
 > Board would have to make the decision to depart from a recommendation of 
 > GAC with a qualified majority (two thirds of the votes of its members). 
 > 
 > 
 > In my personal reading, this decision involves giving more weight to 
 > GAC recommendations would you make to the Board of ICANN, because for 
 > To deviate from these recommendations must attend the vote of a 
 > More members of the Board. 
 > 
 > 
 > LACRALO What do you think? Should we approve the amendment (2/3 vote of 
 > Board members to deviate from recommendations GAC) or should 
 > Remain to date (50% +1 of the votes of its members)? 
 > What 
 > Political implications might this decision and what affectations 
 > May lead to Internet users, specifically in our 
 > Region? 
 > 
 > 
 > Thank you very much.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > Best regards, 
 > 
 > Fatima Cambronero 
 > 
 > 
 > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- 
 > From: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff at atlarge.icann.org>
 > Date: 08/18/2014 21:48 GMT-03: 00 
 > Subject: [ALAC-Announce] New Public Comment: Proposed Bylaws Changes 
 > Regarding Consideration of GAC Advice 
 > To: &quot;alac-announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org&quot; &lt; 
 > Alac-announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org&gt; 
 > 
 > 
> Dear All,
>
> Please kindly note that the At-Large workspace for the following Public
>Comment request has been created: Proposed Bylaws Changes Regarding
>Consideration of GAC Advice <https://community.icann.org/x/KgHxAg>
>
>   Regards,
>
>Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie
>Peregrine and Terri Agnew
>ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC
>E-mail: staff at atlarge.icann.org
>Facebook: www.facebook.com/icann.atlarge
>Twitter: @ICANN_AtLarge <https://twitter.com/ICANN_AtLarge>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>ALAC-Announce mailing list
>ALAC-Announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce
>
>At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>
>
>
>-- 
>*Fatima Cambronero*
>Abogada-Argentina
>
>Phone: +54 9351 5282 668
>Twitter: @facambronero
>Skype: fatima.cambronero
>_______________________________________________
>lac-discuss-es mailing list
>lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es
>
>http://www.lacralo.org

 lac-discuss-en mailing list 
 lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org 
 https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es 

 http://www.lacralo.org 

[[--Original text (es)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/034aa8bed9.html
--]]