[CCWG-ACCT] member organization and single membership structure

Avri Doria avri at acm.org
Thu Jul 9 03:56:54 UTC 2015


This is why I think it is critical to do ATRT3 during 2016 as expected: 
so that while the transition is being implemented we can document the
status of all ATRT recommendations at time 0.  As the work in ATRT2
showed when reviewing the changes from ATRT1, it takes a while, but
stuff does get done and things do change.  Some of the changes ATRT
recommends take time to implement.

But I do believe the IRP changes are essential.

Doing ATRT3 will also, I expect, allow us to fine tune the goals for WS2.


On 08-Jul-15 19:25, Malcolm Hutty wrote:
> On 09/07/2015 00:09, Avri Doria wrote:
>> To go further.
>> There have been attempts to get ICANN in ATRT and other recommendations,
>> as a Multistakeholder organization, to become transparent by default.   
>> These changes are still pending, though approved
> This is sounding like a common pattern: that recommendations were made
> by ATRT, agreed, but "still pending".
> It rather saps one's faith that ATRT is an effective mechanism at all.
>> We do not need membership for this, just a commitment to fulfill the
>> recommendations for full transparency that ICANN has received from
>> almost every review it has had of accountability and transparency.
> You say you have had this commitment already, and yet it is "still
> pending".
> Why would you think yet another such commitment would make any
> difference this time?
> Malcolm.

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list