ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

In disagreement with the recommended change as currently proposed

  • To: comments-bylaws-amend-gac-advice-15aug14@xxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: In disagreement with the recommended change as currently proposed
  • From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 20:04:23 +0300

This is an individual comment.

Though I favor, from a multistakeholder perspective, that Advice from
Advisory Committees be treated with the same degree of respect and vote
threshold as recommendations from the Supporting Organizations, I cannot
support this proposed change at this point in time for the following

1. It seems that the GAC could, according to its procedures and on its
own initiative, change its threshold for advice to the ICANN Board from
a consensus based standard to a majority based standard.  If this were
to happen, I would be concerned that an active group of well organized
governments would be able to produce advice that was one sided and which
exhibited a tyranny of a majority.  An important feature of ICANN
decision making in a multi-interest environment is the consensus
standard. Without a by-laws requirement for a consensus based advisory,
this is a dangerous amendment to make; one which moves us closer to a
Inter-governmental organization.  Given that such a change to its
procedures has been put forward by at least one GAC member, changing
this at this point in time would be unwise.

2. It is singling out the GAC for special treatment among the Advisory
Committees.  I see no reason that other Advisory Committees should not
be included under a similar process change.  The by-laws are already
lopsided in providing greater status to GAC Advice than to ALAC, RSSAC
or SSAC Advice.  I see no reason for such disparity and certainly see no
reason for increasing the disparity even further.

Avri Doria

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy