>I don't know if your mind is a scary thing, but as far as I'm concerned this
>has never been an issue. I've never met anyone until now who thought that
>the ICANN Board couldn't do anything they damn well pleased with SO
>recommendations - implement them, throw them out, use them as toilet paper.
This issue was discussed at the DNSO organizational meeting sponsored by
WITSA in Washington, D.C. in January. (I think your minutes of the closed
Thursday meeting will support this.) Specifically, in reviewing the
bylaws, I voiced a similar reading of Section VI(2)(e) (quoted below),
focusing on the language that the Board "_shall_ accept" SO
recommendations that met the listed criteria.
In the ensuing discussion, a substantial majority of those in the room
believed that I had misread the Bylaws and that the broad language of
subsection (1) gave -- and was intended to give -- the Board wide
discretion to accept, reject or modify SO recommendations. From a strict
legal reading, that is probably correct. But I think Roberto's earlier
post captures the political reality of a Board rejection much better: "In
fact, the Board can, if it pleases, disregard SOs recommendations, but it
is obvious that the Internet Community would expect an argumented reason
for doing that."
-- Bret
=---------------------------------------------------------=
VI (2)(e)
Subject to the provisions of Article III, Section 3,
the Board shall accept the recommendations of a
Supporting Organization if the Board finds that
the recommended policy:
(1) furthers the purposes of, and is in the
best interest of, the Corporation;
(2) is consistent with the Articles and Bylaws;
(3) was arrived at through fair and open processes
(including participation by representatives of
other Supporting Organizations if requested); and
(4) is not reasonably opposed by any other Supporting
Organization.
=---------------------------------------------------------=
