[CCWG-ACCT] A modest proposal to start the week

[Paul Rosenzweig]

At the risk of belaboring a point, permit me a moment to explain why I think history is both vital and important (and this is without regard to how one might read that history):  

 

1) No governance system of any sort is capable of being equally effective against all possible challenges/abuses/situations.  All systems (e.g. one of judicial superiority) are prone to certain risks (e.g. judicial malfeasance) that are inherently less capable of being managed out of the system.  

 

2) As a consequence of that reality, it is incumbent upon those designing a governance system to prioritize risks and build the accountability mechanism in a way that addresses the most likely and/or most consequential risks with a higher degree of certainty than those of lower likelihood/consequence/importance.  This is no more than an exercise in risk assessment and risk management.   

 

3)  With all due respect to Jonathan’s view, I believe that experience is definitely relevant to that risk assessment.  It is =not= the only relevant factor, to be sure, but it bears on the question.  We do not write on a blank slate.

 

All that having been said, I certainly agree with Jonathan that the debate is not advanced by personalizing the question or using the discussion as a forum for relitigating old disagreements.  To the extent comments I may have made contributed to that perception, I humbly apologize.  I will, however, continue to advocate for the view that past experience is germane to our discussions.

 

Warm regards,

Paul

 

Paul Rosenzweig

 <mailto:paul.rosenzweigesq at redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com 

O: +1 (202) 547-0660

M: +1 (202) 329-9650

VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739

Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066

 <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=9> Link to my PGP Key

 

 

From: Jonathan Zuck [mailto:JZuck at actonline.org] 
Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2015 9:08 PM
To: 'Accountability Cross Community'
Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] A modest proposal to start the week

 

Folks,

I’m sure if we think about it for just a second, we can all agree that anyone’s recollections (whatever their tenure or status in the community) about the past intentions, motives and actions of the board, the community or some interest group, are COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. The exercise in which we are engaged involves imaging the worst of these things and attempting to put structures in place to mitigate the consequences should the unfortunate occur. Let’s stop returning to this TOTALLY USELESS discussion of track records and good intentions and stay on task. If you believe the community can do no wrong and the board represents a machiavellian force of darkness that needs to be throttled, you’re in entitled to your opinion. Just take it someplace else. If you believe the community is just a rag tag collection of special interest groups with political motives and  that the board should receive a medal, I hereby validate your opinion as well. Now take it someplace else. This is decidedly NOT the conversation we are trying to have here. Every time it comes up, it sends us down a ridiculous path and ends badly.

 

So here’s my proposal:

 

1.	If you are drafting a post to the list and it begins to sound like either an accusation or defense of the board, the community or some SO or AC, PLEASE STOP TYPING. Back way from the PC, go for a walk, come back and post something that is helpful to the discussion.
2.	If you spot a post that slips through that reads like either an accusation or defense of the board, the community or some SO or AC, DON’T TAKE THE BAIT. Count to 10, call your therapist, do whatever you must, but LET IT GO. 

That is all. Henceforth, I will flag all such posts as overt attempts to derail this process of developing an effective accountability framework for ICANN because there can be no other explanation for their continued existence.  If you find yourself writing something like “in all my years,” “it’s been my experience,” or “I don’t recall” stop typing immediately and think about the useless debate you are about to start or continue.

 

This is NOT about the current board, the current community or anyone’s intentions or motives. It’s about a post IANA contract world in which ICANN needs effective accountability to the community. That’s it. It’s not personal. Let’s get back to work. Thank you.

 

Jonathan

 

 

Jonathan Zuck

President

202-331-2130 X 101 | jzuck at actonline.org <mailto:jzuck at actonline.org>  | Skype: jvzuck

 

ACT | The App Association


 <https://twitter.com/actonline> 

 <https://www.facebook.com/actonline.org> 

 <http://actonline.org/> 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150601/96fd74b6/attachment.html>