[CCWG-ACCT] Call(s) on Thursday
kdrazek at verisign.com
Wed Jul 29 22:41:19 UTC 2015
I agree fully with Jordan’s comments.
The CCWG has done remarkable work in a compressed timeframe that was not of our making.
Let’s continue to work together in the collegial manner we’ve had over the last many months. The pressure is on, but we’ve got to stick together.
We also need to remember that the community asked for this important opportunity and responsibility. In fact, last August, we demanded it. In October 2014 the ICANN Board agreed and handed us the accountability track. It’s up to us to deliver.
If we keep working collaboratively, I’m confident we’ll produce an acceptable consensus proposal that meets the needs of NTIA and the community in an acceptable timeframe.
From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jordan Carter
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 9:39 PM
To: Nigel Roberts
Cc: Accountability Cross Community
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Call(s) on Thursday
Nigel, you could be cynical, or you could not be.
I would far rather we had had more time to do this process. But the powers that be have imposed a timeline on us. It is not self-created urgency in the slightest. It is urgency that comes from, among other places, ICANN itself; the United States Government; parts of the technical community who have wanted to be without the USG link for a very long time.
Please don't assert there's some kind of conspiracy here, because I don't know anyone who thinks that the timeframes for our work have been perfect.
The participants' best efforts, and the excellent legal advice we have had, gives me great confidence that the proposal we are fining up on will not have serious unintended consequences.
Taking another year would not mean an infinitely better proposal. The writing might end up more elegant, but the analysis and the project is the work already of years of reflection and debate by many groups.
I'll close with a quite dull procedural point - the documents that you are not getting much time to review for these calls are generally a) making tiny, incremental changes from previous versions, and b) have been substantially the same for weeks. Nothing is being "sprung" on anyone right now.
On 29 July 2015 at 20:27, Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net<mailto:nigel at channelisles.net>> wrote:
As a mere participant I have found it almost impossible to join the calls due to the vast number of them and the release of important documents no more than hours before.
If I was cynical, I would suggest this method of working was deliberately exclusionary.
As several other participants know from their membership of another extremely important and potentially controversial WG, there is another, better, way.
But that would incompatible with the self-created urgency.
I am beginning to become seriously worried that major changes will be made to the ICANN structure and IANA relationship without the time for due consideration, just because there's a US Presidential election in the office.
On 07/29/2015 09:05 AM, Dr Eberhard Lisse wrote:
I have a previous engagement at 17:00 UTC.
And as previously I object against having 2 or more calls on the same day.
On 2015-07-29 08:23, Grace Abuhamad wrote:
The poll is now closed. Staff will proceed to schedule _two calls
for Thursday 30 July_:
* 11:00 – 13:00 UTC
* 17:00 – 19:00 UTC (this call may need to be extended depending on
Please look forward to calendar notices. The Agenda will follow later
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
+64-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)
Email: jordan at internetnz.net.nz<mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
A better world through a better Internet
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community