[CCWG-ACCT] Fwd: A blog from NTIA

[Jordan Carter]

I am sure Avri will post this to our group but I just wanted to share the
very interesting questions Larry poses us:

In addition to the ICG transition proposal, the final submission to NTIA
must include a plan to enhance ICANN’s accountability. Given that the draft
proposal of the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN
Accountability will be a major focus of the discussions next week in
Argentina, I would like to offer the following questions for stakeholders
to consider:

   - The draft proposes new or modified community empowerment tools. How
   can the Working Group on Accountability ensure that the creation of new
   organizations or tools will not interfere with the security and stability
   of the DNS during and after the transition? Do new committees and
   structures create a different set of accountability questions?
   - The draft proposal focuses on a membership model for community
   empowerment. Have other possible models been thoroughly examined, detailed,
   and documented?  Has the working group designed stress tests of the various
   models to address how the multistakeholder model is preserved if individual
   ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees opt out?  Similarly,
   has the working group developed stress tests to address the potential risk
   of capture and barriers to entry for new participants of the various
   models? Further, have stress tests been considered to address potential
   unintended consequences of “operationalizing” groups that to date have been
   advisory in nature?
   - The draft proposal suggests improvements to the current Independent
   Review Panel (IRP). The IRP has been criticized for its own lack of
   accountability. How does the proposal analyze and remedy existing concerns
   with the IRP?
   - In designing a plan for improved accountability, should the working
   group consider what exactly is the role of the ICANN Board within the
   multistakeholder model?  Should the standard for Board action be to confirm
   that the community has reached consensus, and if so, what accountability
   mechanisms are needed to ensure the Board operates in accordance with that
   standard?
   - The proposal is primarily focused on the accountability of the ICANN
   Board. Has the Working Group also considered if there need to be
   accountability improvements that would apply to ICANN management and staff
   or to the various ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees?

All of these questions require thoughtful consideration prior to the
community’s completion of the transition plan. Similar to the ICG, the
Working Group on Accountability will need to build a public record and
thoroughly document how the NTIA criteria have been met and will be
maintained in the future.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *Avri Doria* <avri at acm.org>
Date: Wednesday, 17 June 2015
Subject: [ccwg-internet-governance] A blog from NTIA
To: "cwg-stewardship at icann.org" <cwg-stewardship at icann.org>



http://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2015/stakeholder-proposals-come-together-icann-meeting-argentina

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org <javascript:;>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship



-- 
Jordan Carter
Chief Executive, InternetNZ

+64-21-442-649 | jordan at internetnz.net.nz

Sent on the run, apologies for brevity
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150617/eae79bcd/attachment.html>