<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>+1 Richard</p>
    <p>Wyn <br>
    </p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5 May 2020 5:33 pm, Richard Hill via
      Chapter-delegates wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:005601d622c0$377618c0$a6624a40$@ch">
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Thank you for this, and please see embedded comments below.

Best,
Richard

</pre>
      <blockquote type="cite">
        <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">-----Original Message-----
From: Chapter-delegates [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:chapter-delegates">mailto:chapter-delegates</a>-
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bounces@elists.isoc.org">bounces@elists.isoc.org</a>] On Behalf Of 'Andrew Sullivan' via Chapter-
delegates
Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 00:30
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org">Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org</a>
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] FW: Ethos/PIR/ISoc statements
regarding ICANN's rejection of the sale of PIR/.ORG

On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 11:34:31PM +0200, Richard Hill wrote:

</pre>
        <blockquote type="cite">
          <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Let's agree to disagree. In my view, the statement that ICANN acted
</pre>
        </blockquote>
        <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">outside
</pre>
        <blockquote type="cite">
          <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">its mandate IS a policy statement that should have been consulted
</pre>
        </blockquote>
        <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">with the
</pre>
        <blockquote type="cite">
          <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">membership.
</pre>
        </blockquote>
        <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
You may certainly disagree with me about it, but I don't see how a
claim about what ICANN did can be understood as a public position
paper that would normally entail consultation under
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.internetsociety.org/about-internet-society/policy">https://www.internetsociety.org/about-internet-society/policy</a>-
development-process/.
</pre>
      </blockquote>
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
I agree that commenting on what ICANN did does not fall under a narrow
reading of that policy development process.

However, in my view, the allegation that ICANN didn't merely enforce a
contractual clause, but instead exceeded its mandate and violated its
bylaws, is a serious attack on ICANN's legitimacy. In my view, such an
attack should have been consulted with the membership, in keeping with the
spirit, if not the letter, of the cited policy development process.

As I've said before, I think that ISOC has much to gain, and little to lose,
by consulting its membership. Surely it can consult even if is not strictly
required to do so by its written policies?



_______________________________________________

</pre>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>