[CCWG-ACCT] Blog post on the Accountability work headed to Dublin

Jordan Carter jordan at internetnz.net.nz
Tue Oct 13 12:47:20 UTC 2015


The idea that the Board could rely on such duties to not accept a consensus
community proposal of any of the varieties the CCWG has been developing
defies belief.

Jordan

On 13 October 2015 at 13:42, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
wrote:

> We talk a lot about "fiduciary duty" but seem to be determined to ignore
> it.
>
> The Board ultimately has to implement the new Bylaws that will effect the
> changes, whatever they are. Board members have a fiduciary duty to not do
> anything that they believe is against the best interests of ICANN (forgive
> the double negative). If they are forwarding a proposal that in their
> collective opinion they will not adopt, they have a moral obligation to say
> that ahead of time.
>
> Knowing that, I do wish there had been active Board participation a lot
> earlier, but we are where we are.
>
> Alan
>
>
> At 12/10/2015 09:18 PM, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:
>
>> And that, it seems to me, Bruce, is at the nub of the problem.  In theory,
>> the Board has committed to transmitting whatever the CCWG submits, but in
>> reserving the right to negate what has been submitted with its own
>> comments
>> (which would, in effect, kill any proposal) it takes away with the left
>> hand
>> what it gives with the right.  It is, as EL says, now down to who blinks
>> first, it seems.
>>
>> More to the point however, whenever the Board says the first part ("we
>> will
>> submit whatever we get") without also saying the second part ("but we
>> reserve the right to countermand that submittal with comments") it is
>> misleading.  Many in the community read the "we will submit" as an
>> endorsement of the CCWG process without limitation.  Leaving out the
>> critical limitation makes statements incomplete and adversely effects
>> communication and expectation.  Thus, the Board's promise in Buenos Aires
>> was read as more palliative than it actually is because of its reserved
>> powers.
>>
>> In addition, when someone (like Senator Thune) asks the question from a
>> practical perspective ("will the board accept") then leaving out the
>> caveat
>> is an omission that affirmatively obscures the reality.
>>
>> And then, there is the last sadder point:  Which is that the Board's
>> reservation of a right to comment even after it participates in the
>> process
>> and, hypothetically, has the community reject its concerns reflects a
>> distrust of the MSM and a paternalistic attitude that suggests to me all
>> sorts of inadequacies.  If the Board's conclusion is true, then ICANN is
>> not
>> fit for the transition.  If it is false, then the Board misreads the
>> community badly.  Either prospect is daunting
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> Paul Rosenzweig
>> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
>> O: +1 (202) 547-0660
>> M: +1 (202) 329-9650
>> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
>> Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066
>> Link to my PGP Key
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au]
>> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2015 9:21 PM
>> To: Accountability Cross Community
>> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Blog post on the Accountability work headed to
>> Dublin
>>
>> Hello Mike,
>>
>>
>> >>  Are you going to forward them promptly, or follow the Charter and the
>> Resolution of 10/16/14?
>>
>> We will do both.
>>
>> If there is any disagreement - we will include that in a note to the NTIA
>> along with the ICG and CCWG Proposals, and then initiate a dialogue with
>> the
>> CCWG.   We will advise the NTIA of the outcome of any such process.   The
>> NTIA could either wait for the process to conclude, or it could be that
>> the
>> NTIA decides that the area of disagreement is not material to the IANA
>> stewardship.   I don't wish to speculate, that is for the NTIA to decide.
>> The aim clearly is to develop a proposal that has broad support, and
>> avoids
>> the need for any follow on process.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bruce Tonkin
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>



-- 
Jordan Carter

Chief Executive
*InternetNZ*

+64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)
Email: jordan at internetnz.net.nz
Skype: jordancarter
Web: www.internetnz.nz

*A better world through a better Internet *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151013/1c02011e/attachment.html>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list