[CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

[Nigel Roberts]

> Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO?  I have
> never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.
>
> avri

This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural 
judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected 
better from Mr Chehade' in that department

Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent 
previous CEOs.  Certainly not from Paul.  In fact not even from Rod, who 
  despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways was, 
in many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures!

In China, relationships matter.

Appearance matters. A lot.

Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than the 
'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the 
discussion with the relevant actors inside China.

The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a 
cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' 
for peccadilloes).

So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't see 
the problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here.

I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I 
personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet once 
again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'.  A CEO can never 
be in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. 
(It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. 
Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.)

The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his 
resignation, choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, 
and in another revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an 
apparently completely different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make 
supportive statements of them and their backers.

Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'.

UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations 
that operate in the same sphere.  Why, in the name of accountabaility, 
does ICANN still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the 
terrible optics of Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be 
onerous.

Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count.

Hardly at all.

It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more than 
'what', or even 'why'.


> '
> And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!
>


Likewise.