<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi Parminder<div><br><div><div>On Jun 2, 2012, at 3:05 PM, parminder wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); ">Quoting your proposal<br><blockquote> "Governments should be involved not as “oversight” authorities or “public policy makers” but as backers of a<br>shared legal framework that maintains accountability and gives non-state actors a legal basis for settling important disputes."<br></blockquote>I see 'oversight' as largely meaning as backing and ensuring adherence to the relevant legal framework (arrived through the international treaty spoken of above) and maintaining accountability. I quote from my email / proposal "... this body will have a very narrowly defined role, with duly laid out procedure to fulfil it. There would not be much proactive work for it to do at all. " How do you think this corresponds to your observations on my proposal, and I quote you<br><br>"<span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); ">The big difference is that you seem to want an "oversight" body with the arbitrary power to make policy from the top down and impose it on ICANN processes and communities, whereas our proposals are designed to prevent just that." ????</span></span></span></blockquote></div></div><div><br></div><div>Without wanting to get between you and Milton when you two are having so much fun, this really caught my eye. From WSIS Phase I to the CIRP proposal, "oversight" has been equated by its proponents with authoritative policy/decision making by an intergovernmental body. In a similar vein, the IT4C statement for the CSTD meeting also spoke of transferring oversight from the USG to an intergovernmental body. Am I reading correctly that for you, oversight now just means ensuring adherence to international law established by a treaty? If so, there might be a few seeds of convergence that could be watered. I'm not terribly optimistic about a treaty negotiation, but there could be alternatives, e.g. an independent ICANN & global Affirmation of Commitments on zone file authorizations...</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div><br></div><div>Bill</div></body></html>