[CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: FW: ICANN Board Comments on Third CCWG-Accountability Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations

[Paul Rosenzweig]

With respect Bruce, that is not responsive.  Your last statement that " any specifics of a proposal that could result in limiting ICANN’s ability to deliver on this role is a concern to the ICANN Board" is a truism -- but there are many things that might limit your ability (lack of funding say) that are not in any way connected to the global public interest.  You cannot possibly mean that if the Board thinks it limits ICANN it is, by definition, not in the GPI -- or if you do mean that then the Board has a very, very inflated sense of itself and the relative importance of its mission.

Likewise there are many things in the global public interest that would improve (or at least not diminish) ICANN's ability to deliver the services it is tasked with delivering.   You can't possibly be saying that things which are affirmatively in the global interest (greater diversity, for example) are not in ICANN's definition of GPI if they can be judged by ICANN to interfere with its operations.   That, in effect, gives the Board a veto to say that it if adversely effects us, it can't be in the GPI -- even when the broader definition of GPI clearly suggests that it is.

The Board's objection to enhanced transparency (in its comments on the Third Proposal) is a perfect example of this latter case -- the Board substituting its own judgement of what is good for ICANN for a judgment of what is in the GPI.  I am more than willing to agree that greater transparency might impose greater process restrictions on Board activity and thus, in some perverse sense, be read to "limit ICANN's ability to deliver" its services -- by putting in more restrictions on what the Board can do.  But for the Board to equate that with a restriction that is contrary to the GPI is to mistake ICANN for the globe and ICANN's interests for those of the people it serves.

I continue to be dismayed at this type of response from the Board which reflects a lack of understanding of what the accountability project is all about.

Paul


Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com 
O: +1 (202) 547-0660
M: +1 (202) 329-9650
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066
Link to my PGP Key


-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 5:54 AM
To: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: FW: ICANN Board Comments on Third CCWG-Accountability Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations

Hello Mathieu,

>>  After the topic was raised again during our CCWG call today, may I kindly request an update on this request for clarification ? 

Coming to an agreed definition of the global public interest is part of ICANN’s strategic plan.

It is the 5th of five strategic initiatives:

“Develop and implement a global public interest framework bounded by ICANN’s mission.”

Until this is done, the Board is guided by the global public interest as set out in our Articles of Incorporation:

in recognition of the fact that the Internet is an international network of networks, owned by no single nation, individual or organization, 

ICANN shall, except as limited by Article 5 hereof, pursue the charitable and public purposes of lessening the burdens of government and promoting the global public interest in the operational stability of the Internet by 

(i) coordinating the assignment of Internet technical parameters as needed to maintain universal connectivity on the Internet; 

(ii) performing and overseeing functions related to the coordination of the Internet Protocol ("IP") address space; 

(iii) performing and overseeing functions related to the coordination of the Internet domain name system ("DNS"), including the development of policies for determining the circumstances under which new top-level domains are added to the DNS root system; 

(iv) overseeing operation of the authoritative Internet DNS root server system; 

and (v) engaging in any other related lawful activity in furtherance of items (i) through (iv)."


By inference therefore any specifics of a proposal that could result in limiting ICANN’s ability to deliver on this role is a concern to the ICANN Board.  

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin






_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community