[CCWG-ACCT] Blog: Working Together Through The Last Mile

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

The effort to spin the replacement recommendation as just
operationalization is impressive.

I do not understand the references to capture unless they mean capture
by the community from the Board.  I suppose that from their perspective
the CMSM would appear to be capture in and of itself, as it gives the
community a share of the power they now hold for themselves.  I think
any discussion of capture that goes beyond FUD, needs an analysis who
who has captured the current ICANN model.  Capture is always an
interesting topic because it often means: "who is trying to share my
power now?"  I am all for opening up the discussion to the power
anlaysi, current, potential and likely.

Additionally, I do not understand this statement:

> where the current proposal still warrants much detail that may not be
> achievable 

While it is true that is needs a bit more detail, though perhaps much
less that is being claimed - until it is time for implementaton, it is
not as bad as all of that.  What do they mean that an adequate level of
detail is not achievable? Though I have learned that if someone does not
wish to accept a proposal, it can never have enough detail. 

I think we are facing a critical moment in this transition where we, as
a community, will have to decide whether we want the transition so badly
that we are willing to surrender and let the Board have complete control
without any possibility of ever being subject to oversight ever again. 
The transition is the time to switch from NTIA oversight to community
oversight.  If this is not possible, then perhaps the transition should
not go forward.

We need to consider this turn of affairs quite carefully.


avri

On 04-Sep-15 15:53, Grace Abuhamad wrote:
> Original
> link: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/working-together-through-the-last-mile
>
>
>   Working Together Through The Last Mile
>
> <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/working-together-through-the-last-mile#><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/working-together-through-the-last-mile#><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/working-together-through-the-last-mile#><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/working-together-through-the-last-mile#><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/working-together-through-the-last-mile#><https://www.icann.org/news/blog/working-together-through-the-last-mile#>
>
> I'd like to thank everyone who has participated in both the CCWG
> briefing to the ICANN Board
> <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=56132981>,
> and the CCWG and ICANN board dialogue
> <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=56133316>.
> All of our dialogues over the past months have been illuminating,
> challenging and in my opinion, an important and true testament to the
> multistakeholder model as we work toward the IANA Stewardship Transition.
>
> */We support the important improvements for ICANN's accountability
> contained in the CCWG-Accountability's 2nd Draft Proposal. We endorse
> the goal of enforceability of these accountability mechanisms, and we
> believe that it is possible to implement the key elements of the
> proposal. We want to work together to achieve the elements of the
> proposal within the community's timeline while meeting
> the NTIA requirements./*
>
> As we enter the final days of the Public Comment period, the Board
> wants to be completely clear on our position. We are in agreement on
> key concepts set forward in the CCWG's proposal, for example:
>
>   * Fundamental bylaws.
>   * Specific requirements for empowering the community into the bylaws
>     adoption process.
>   * IRP enhancements.
>   * Board and director removal.
>   * ICANN's mission and core values.
>   * Strengthening requirements for empowering the community in the
>     budget, operational and strategic planning process.
>   * The incorporation of the Affirmation of Commitments Reviews
>     intoICANN bylaws.
>   * Community ability to enforce the accountability mechanisms in the
>     bylaws.
>
> We have suggestions on how these could be operationalized. With
> regards to the mechanisms for community enforceability, where the
> current proposal still warrants much detail that may not be achievable
> we have a suggestion on how to deliver on it in a stable way, as
> increased enforceability must not open up questions of, for example,
> capture or diminishing of checks and balances.
>
> Let's work together on operationalizing the above principles on which
> we agree. Once again, we are committed to providing more detail on how
> these ideas can be operationalized in a way that they can be
> implemented within the community identified time frame for the
> transition, as well as have sufficient tested grounds to not result in
> unintended consequences.
>
> During last night's discussion we shared this feedback. It was a lot
> of information to digest in a call (notes around opening remarks
> <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/2015-September/005160.html>, notes
> around 10 points
> <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/2015-September/005161.html>),
> and we appreciate everyone giving our advice consideration. We are
> committed to submitting our comments into the Public Comment process
> in the next few days, and we look forward to the working with the
> community on further details.
>
> It is critical that we work together to build enhanced accountability
> forICANN and continue to refine and flesh out details of the
> impressive work already done by the community and complete
> the IANAStewardship Transition.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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