[CCWG-ACCT] Update from Brussels

Fri Oct 9 08:24:13 UTC 2015

Hi,

I found Willie's statement to be quite understandable and a welcome
statement at this time.

As a group we have been criticized by some outside our group for the
rough and tumble of our ways of talking to each other.  I have not
escaped the criticism for my own writing at times.  Perhaps it would be
good to leave writing advice to English teachers. 

avri

On 09-Oct-15 03:35, Nigel Roberts wrote:
> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>

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