[CCWG-ACCT] Defending and Protecting Work Stream 2

[Dr Eberhard W Lisse]

Kieren,

as we have seen, the most effective way of doing this is be to make
ALAC to renege themselves.


That said, I am on record in front of a number of witnesses, as
saying when we started with this: "This will be an enormous workload
on the volunteers, and in the end ICANN is going to take the report
and do whatever it wants, again".

(I was a member of the gNSO Delete Task Force and the Exchange of
Letters Task Force, where if I remember correctly not even waited
for the final report).



el

On 2015-10-30 16:53 , Kieren McCarthy wrote:
> A quick question: who has the authority to form and disband this
> working group?
> 
> Because one of the big problems identified in the past over ICANN
> accountability and transparency has been the fact that when a
> report is handed in, ICANN has decided that that group no longer
> exists.
> 
> And that has meant the ability to review or continue progress has
> been lost until years later when another group is formed.
> 
> I have no doubt whatsoever that ICANN will push to have work
> stream 1 limited and to kill off work stream 2.  The most
> effective way to do that would be for the Board to simply declare
> this working group's work completed.
> 
> Can it do that?  What would this group do in response if it did?
> 
> 
> Kieren
[...]

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4218 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151030/a5e54a9b/smime.p7s>