ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[soac-mapo]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[soac-mapo] RE: Clarification needed on when higher Board threshold is needed

  • To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx" <soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx>, Margie Milam <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [soac-mapo] RE: Clarification needed on when higher Board threshold is needed
  • From: Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 07:46:36 -0400

From: owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
Gomes, Chuck

I think it would help us to clarify various positions on when higher Board 
threshold is needed.  To facilitate that, let me ask the following questions:

1.            Some have been very specific that a 2/3 majority of the Board 
should be required to uphold an objection.  Am I correct in assuming that this 
would be the same regardless of the input provided by the expert panel?

In my preference, yes.

2.            Others have said that a 2/3 majority of the Board should be 
required to approve a string for entry into the root.  Is this also independent 
of the input from the experts?

Not applicable to me - I don't think there should be a 2/3 majority for simple 
entry into the root. The Board and GNSO have promulgated policies and 
procedures to be met by applicants. If they meet them, the Board should merely 
ascertain that and add it to the root. I do not understand the need for a 
supermajority here. More important, I do not understand the relevance of this 
question to our CWG WG. If no objection is present, then our discussions don't 
apply, do they? Why should we be making policy or

3.            The two above questions can probably be asked in one:  Whenever a 
higher threshold is required for the Board to make a decision on a string, is 
that threshold independent of the input from the experts?

Yes (in my preference)

Assuming that the answer to these questions is yes in each case, it seems like 
we need to poll support for the following that I think relate to issue 5 so I 
will number them accordingly:

5.1  A higher threshold of the Board should be required to uphold an objection.

5.2  A higher threshold of the Board should be required to approve a string.

5.3  The higher threshold should be at least 2/3.

5.4   Approval of a string should only require a simple majority of the Board 
regardless of the input from the experts.

5.5  Approval of a string should only require a simple majority of the Board 
except when the expert input indicates otherwise, in which case a higher 
threshold should be required.

I hope these questions help us narrow down what level agreement we have on 
these issues.  I believe that it is okay to support more than one of these 
except where the answers are contradictory. Please feel free to make 
suggestions, comment and ask questions.

Margie/Marika - Let's add these questions to the next Doodle poll, 
understanding that they might change before we initiate the poll later today.

Chuck


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy