[CCWG-ACCT] Update from Brussels

Nigel Roberts nigel at channelisles.net
Fri Oct 9 07:35:55 UTC 2015


Willie

This is wholly unreadable.

I literally have no idea whether I disagree or disagree since I didn't 
get past the second sentence of this stream-of-consciouness epistle 
before my brain disconnected involuntarily.

Might I venture to recommend the following aide-écriture?

http://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/ld/resources/writing/grammar/grammar-guides/paras


Regards


On 09/10/15 08:06, william currie wrote:
> Thanks, Steve.
>
> I want to clarify why I think the Board is acting in bad faith. The Board
> have a particular position as the highest decision-making body in the ICANN
> ecosystem and as such have the status of being the Accountable Actor - the
> "who" in the accountability chain: "who is accountable to whom, for what,
> by which standardss, and why?" When it comes to the process of developing a
> new accountability mechanism for ICANN, they have to negotiate a conflict
> of interest, namely, that they are the subject of the accountability
> process and therefore have an interest in the outcome that may be
> self-serving to their current position in the ICANN ecosystem. So when they
> acted to intervene in the multistakeholder process (whether in their minds
> they thought they were acting in good faith, i.e. making their views and
> counterproposal known) they could not override this conflict of interest
> and have compounded it. As I have observed the CCWG-A in action, I have
> been impressed by the delicate and respectful way that members of different
> SOs and ACs have conducted themselves in working through the complex
> options available, compromising where necessary to achieve a fragile
> consensus position in the the second draft proposal.  This was the bottom
> up multistakeholder in action. What the Board did was to use their power to
> destroy this consensus. And in doing so it was not possible to distinguish
> whether they were acting in their own (conflicted) interest or for the
> public interest. One has to read their action against the playbook of the
> powerful, one of whose classic techniques is "divide and rule" and as far
> as I can see they have driven a wedge into the CCWG-A.
>
> Ironically, if the Community Accountability Mechanism were currently in
> place, this would constitute grounds to activate the community power to
> spill the whole Board.
>
>   Willie
>
> On Thursday, October 8, 2015, william currie <willie.currie at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I endorse the CENTR and European Commission statement and encourage the
>> CCWG-A not to lose heart at the eleventh hour.
>>
>> Only a form of membership in ICANN can replace the NTIA accountability
>> function. And it seems that only the GAC and the GNSO have the
>> consistency and coherence to prevent the dilution attempts by the Board. At
>> Large and ASO have wavered their way through the process. And are likely to
>> go with a compromise. It is not clear what incentives NTIA is operating
>> under and whether they have been supportive of the Board's intervention or
>> not.
>>
>> If I were to assess the position of South Africa and the Africa Group,
>> they are waiting for the current multi-stakeholder process to collapse as
>> now seems very likely. In the context of ICANN's botched dotAfrica process,
>> African governments do not have any confidence in ICANN as a trustworthy or
>> competent institution. They are much more persuaded by the
>> intergovernmental logic of the ITU, where they are treated with respect.
>> It is patently obvious to Africans involved in internet governance that the
>> Board is effecting an anti-democratic manoevre to dilute the introduction
>> of basic accountabilities. If they succeed they will have made a mockery of
>> the bottom-up multi-stakeholder process. In any constitutional change, the
>> task is to make a best effort to make the best decisions and not to try and
>> use the uncertainty of the future to second-guess those decisions as the
>> Board is attempting to do. I must say that I believe the Board is acting in
>> bad faith and should be removed.
>>
>> I call on the GAC and the GNSO to resist this attempt by the Board to
>> railroad the CCWG-A into a false compromise. It is better that there be no
>> consensus at Dublin than for GNSO and GAC to support a "solution" that will
>> only reinforce African and international perception that ICANN is a
>> dangerously flawed institution that should under no circumstances by
>> entrusted with the IANA function.
>>
>> Willie Currie
>> An Advisor to CCWG-Accountability
>>
>> On Thursday, October 8, 2015, Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','psc at vlaw-dc.com');>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks. Very clear and important statement.
>>>
>>> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
>>> Virtualaw LLC
>>> 1155 F Street, NW
>>> Suite 1050
>>> Washington, DC 20004
>>> 202-559-8597/Direct
>>> 202-559-8750/Fax
>>> 202-255-6172/cell
>>>
>>> Twitter: @VlawDC
>>>
>>> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
>>> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mathieu
>>> Weill
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 10:39 AM
>>> To: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Update from Brussels
>>>
>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>
>>> Along with some European members and participants of our group, I am
>>> attending the CENTR meeting in Brussels. This morning was a joint session
>>> with the European High Level Internet Governance group (made of european
>>> GAC representives), and it discussed the IANA Stewardship transition.
>>>
>>> The outcome of this meeting is summarized in the statement that is now
>>> online :
>>> https://t.co/EuolALNkgV
>>>
>>> You can also find my update regarding our work on our wiki (feel free to
>>> re-use) :
>>>
>>> https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/CENTR+Accountability+Update
>>>
>>>
>>> As part of the discussion, I have noted a suggestion by Roelof that we
>>> prepare a short, understandable paper to summarize the state of play,
>>> and what remains to be done.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> --
>>> *****************************
>>> Mathieu WEILL
>>> AFNIC - directeur général
>>> Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06
>>> mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
>>> Twitter : @mathieuweill
>>> *****************************
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>
>>> -----
>>> No virus found in this message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>> Version: 2015.0.6140 / Virus Database: 4419/10680 - Release Date: 09/22/15
>>> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>



More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list