<html><body>
<div style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Tahoma; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
font-weight: 400; font-style: normal; background-image: none;
background-attachment: scroll; background-origin: padding-box;
background-clip: border-box; background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);
background-size: auto; background-position: 0% 0%; background-repeat: repeat
repeat;">I agree with Keith, Alan and Robin: what is important is not the
facade of accountability, we already have that, but true transparency and
accountability that ensures ICANN is truly responsive to the desires of the
community and of the larger world.</div>
<div style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Tahoma; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
font-weight: 400; font-style: normal; background-image: none;
background-attachment: scroll; background-origin: padding-box;
background-clip: border-box; background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);
background-size: auto; background-position: 0% 0%; background-repeat: repeat
repeat;"> </div>
<div style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Tahoma; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
font-weight: 400; font-style: normal; background-image: none;
background-attachment: scroll; background-origin: padding-box;
background-clip: border-box; background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);
background-size: auto; background-position: 0% 0%; background-repeat: repeat
repeat;">
<div>That's one of the reasons I'm supportive, in a general sense,
of proposals to transform ICANN into a membership structure under California
law. Members of a California public benefits corporation are entitled to
file derivative actions against the Board and Board members thereof for
fraud and other egregious actions contrary to the best interests of the
corporation. It's not a cure all, being limited to those instances where
the corporation has failed to enforce it's rights against third parties,
broadly construed, but it is a powerful weapon that vests in the membership
the ultimate conduct and direction of the corporation in some very important
operational areas. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>One negative aspect of the California Corporations Code in this regard
is the possibility of a bond of up to $50,000 being required by the court to
pursue a derivative action (California Corporations Code §5710 ).
This highlights an issue we are going to have to face in constructing an
effective accountability scheme: affordability. Our current accountability
structure falls flat in this area, with access to an IRP being effectively
denied to those without extensive resources. This limits the ability of
small businesses, nonprofits and many individual registrants to hold ICANN
accountable for it's actions. We need to do better in this area as we
transform ICANN into a true model of accountable corporate governance and,
working together, I'm sure we will.</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">-----Original
Message-----<br />
From: "Drazek, Keith" <kdrazek@verisign.com><br />
To: "'Accountability Cross Community'"
<accountability-cross-community@icann.org><br />
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 15:05:59 +0000<br />
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] The big test of effective accountability<br />
<div class="WordSection1">
<div class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
Completely agree with Alan and Robin.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
<o:p> </o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
Keith<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
<o:p> </o:p></span></div>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in
0in">
<div class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org
[mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] <b>On Behalf Of
</b>Alan Greenberg<br />
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, January 31, 2015 1:35 PM<br />
<b>To:</b> Robin Gross; Paul Rosenzweig<br />
<b>Cc:</b> 'Accountability Cross Community'<br />
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] The big test of effective accountability<o:p>
</o:p></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">Correct, a Bylaw alone is not sufficient. What is
needed is a way to ensure that if the Board does not follow its Bylaws, the
community can take action. Whether that means we can overturn a Board action
or force an action (in the case of inaction), remove part or all of the
Board, have clear standing to take them to court, or some other remedy or
combination of remedies is what we are here for.<br />
<br />
Alan<br />
<br />
At 31/01/2015 01:05 PM, Robin Gross wrote:<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">I think we'd need more than a bylaw amendment
because the problem is at the level of the <u>enforcement</u> of the
bylaws. For example Annex A in ICANN's bylaws describes the way
GNSO policy must be made in a bottom-up fashion. The existence of the
bylaws has not stopped the staff from changing GNSO policy and the bylaws
have not stopped the board from looking the other way when staff does.
We need those bylaws enforced and it is the board's job to do
that. <br />
<br />
So I do not believe a bylaw amendment on its own is sufficient to provide
the assurance that the bylaws will be enforced.<br />
<br />
Robin<br />
<br />
On Jan 30, 2015, at 7:37 PM, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:<br />
<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><a
name="_MailEndCompose">I agree Robin. So then what is your view on a
Bylaw amendment as a commitment with teeth/inevitability? Prior to
this discussion, I was of the view that changing the Bylaws was both a
necessary and sufficient condition to satisfy a WS1 requirement. Now I
see that we have at least one case scenario where a Bylaw mandate has gone
unexecuted for years, despite e.g</a>. the failure being called out in ATRT1
and ATRT2. This makes me concerned that one could,
hypothetically, change the Bylaws to require our new membership
organization, or the redress mechanism that is my own focus, have the Bylaw
passed and written in stone and still not see the actual membership or
redress change take effect because ICANN as an institution slow-walks the
change. This makes me want to consider strongly whether our phrasing
in WS1 of “implemented or committed to” is too loose and ought
not to be changed to “implemented” ….<br />
<br />
Paul<br />
<br />
<b>**NOTE: OUR NEW ADDRESS -- EFFECTIVE 12/15/14 ***</b><br />
509 C St. NE<br />
Washington, DC 20002<br />
<br />
Paul Rosenzweig<br />
<a href="mailto:paul.rosenzweigesq@redbranchconsulting.com">
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com</a><br />
O: +1 (202) 547-0660<br />
M: +1 (202) 329-9650<br />
Skype: +1 (202) 738-1739 or paul.rosenzweig1066<br />
<a
href="http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=9">
Link to my PGP Key</a><br />
<br />
<b>From:</b> Robin Gross [<a href="mailto:robin@ipjustice.org">
mailto:robin@ipjustice.org</a>]<br />
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, January 30, 2015 4:19 PM<br />
<b>To:</b> Accountability Cross Community<br />
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] The big test of effective accountability<br
/>
<br />
I interpret WS1 as those items for which more than mere promises have been
made to implement, but rather items where commitments that have some teeth
(or inevitability) are in place, such that they couldn't be left
lingering indefinitely.<br />
<br />
Robin<br />
<br />
On Jan 30, 2015, at 12:39 PM, David W. Maher wrote:<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">+1<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">David W. Maher<o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Senior Vice President
– Law & Policy<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Public Interest Registry<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">312 375 4849 <o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">From: Jonathan Zuck <<a
href="mailto:JZuck@actonline.org">JZuck@actonline.org</a>><o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Date: Friday, January 30,
2015 2:30 PM<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To: Paul Rosenzweig <<a
href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com">
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com</a>>, "'McAuley,
David'" <<a href="mailto:dmcauley@verisign.com">
dmcauley@verisign.com</a>>, 'Accountability Cross Community'
<<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] The
big test of effective accountability<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Indeed<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Sent from my Windows
Phone<o:p></o:p></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:center"><o:p> </o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">From: <a
href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com"> Paul Rosenzweig</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Sent: 1/30/2015 3:29 PM<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To: <a
href="mailto:dmcauley@verisign.com"> 'McAuley, David'</a>; <a
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">'Accountability
Cross Community'</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] The
big test of effective accountability<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Thank you David for that
explanation. To be candid it only heightens my view that the
accountability measures the community wants need to be both committed to and
actually implemented in place before the IANA transition occurs.<o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Paul<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">**NOTE: OUR NEW
ADDRESS -- EFFECTIVE 12/15/14 ***<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">509 C St. NE<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Washington, DC 20002<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Paul Rosenzweig<o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a
href="mailto:paul.rosenzweigesq@redbranchconsulting.com">
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">O: +1 (202) 547-0660<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">M: +1 (202) 329-9650<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Skype: +1 (202) 738-1739 or
paul.rosenzweig1066<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a
href="http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=9">
Link to my PGP Key</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">From: McAuley, David [<a
href="mailto:dmcauley@verisign.com">mailto:dmcauley@verisign.com</a>] <o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Sent: Friday, January 30,
2015 1:42 PM<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To: Paul Rosenzweig;
'Accountability Cross Community'<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] The
big test of effective accountability<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">That is how the DCA Trust
IRP panel seemed to see it, Paul.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Bylaw Art. IV, Section 3.6
says this:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">There shall be an omnibus
standing panel of between six and nine members with a variety of expertise,
including jurisprudence, judicial experience, alternative dispute resolution
and knowledge of ICANN's mission and work from which each specific IRP
Panel shall be selected. The panelists shall serve for terms that are
staggered to allow for continued review of the size of the panel and the
range of expertise. A Chair of the standing panel shall be appointed for a
term not to exceed three years. Individuals holding an official position or
office within the ICANN structure are not eligible to serve on the standing
panel. In the event that an omnibus standing panel: (i) is not in place when
an IRP Panel must be convened for a given proceeding, the IRP proceeding
will be considered by a one- or three-member panel comprised in accordance
with the rules of the IRP Provider; or (ii) is in place but does not have
the requisite diversity of skill and experience needed for a particular
proceeding, the IRP Provider shall identify one or more panelists, as
required, from outside the omnibus standing panel to augment the panel
members for that proceeding.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">It is open to some
interpretation because it instructs how to choose a panel if a standing
panel is not in place. A reasonable (to me) interpretation of the provision
is that the alternative way of selecting a panel is for those cases prior to
a standing panel being stood up. But it has been years and the introductory
language to the bylaw is: “There shall be …”<o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Here is the full paragraph
of what the DCA Trust IRP panel said in the procedural ruling in August:<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">114) The need for a
compulsory remedy is concretely shown by ICANN’s longstanding failure
to implement the provision of the Bylaws and Supplementary Procedures
requiring the creation of a standing panel. ICANN has offered no explanation
for this failure, which evidences that a self-policing regime at ICANN is
insufficient. The failure to create a standing panel has consequences, as
this case shows, delaying the processing of DCA Trust’s claim, and
also prejudicing the interest of a competing .AFRICA applicant. (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-procedure-declaration-14aug14-en.pdf">
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-procedure-declaration-14aug14-en.pdf</a>
)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To be fair, this was an
interim ruling by a single panel and ICANN would most assuredly not agree
with this decision.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To your question, regarding
“failed to implement,” I would say failed so far. I think
Avri’s term “lingering” is a good one – this is
lingering so far.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">David<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">From: Paul Rosenzweig [<a
href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com">
mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com</a>] <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Sent: Friday, January 30,
2015 11:45 AM<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To: McAuley, David;
'Accountability Cross Community'<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] The
big test of effective accountability<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">David<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Can you elaborate on this
please? This is the first instance I’ve read of in which it is
said that ICANN failed to implement a Bylaw mandate. Is that a fair
description? Because if it is, that suggests to me the possibility
that even a Bylaw change might not be adequate to satisfy accountability
requirements until the bylaw as actually implemented.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Or am I misreading what you
are saying?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Paul<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">**NOTE: OUR NEW
ADDRESS -- EFFECTIVE 12/15/14 ***<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">509 C St. NE<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Washington, DC 20002<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Paul Rosenzweig<o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a
href="mailto:paul.rosenzweigesq@redbranchconsulting.com">
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">O: +1 (202) 547-0660<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">M: +1 (202) 329-9650<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Skype: +1 (202) 738-1739 or
paul.rosenzweig1066<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a
href="http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=9">
Link to my PGP Key</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">From: McAuley, David [<a
href="mailto:dmcauley@verisign.com">mailto:dmcauley@verisign.com</a>] <o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Sent: Friday, January 30,
2015 9:26 AM<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To: Accountability Cross
Community<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] The
big test of effective accountability<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Another thing that ICANN has
let linger (and which is not a recommendation but a bylaw) is the creation
of a standing IRP panel that would have “a variety of expertise,
including jurisprudence, judicial experience, alternative dispute resolution
and knowledge of ICANN's mission and work” to populate panels on
individual IRP cases.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">The panel in the (still
ongoing) IRP case brought by DotConnectAfrica (DCA) Trust over the handling
of the new .africa TLD recognized that the lack of a standing panel had an
impact (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-procedure-declaration-14aug14-en.pdf">
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-procedure-declaration-14aug14-en.pdf</a>
):<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">“The failure to create
a standing panel has consequences, as this case shows, delaying the
processing of DCA Trust’s claim, and also prejudicing the interest of
a competing .AFRICA applicant.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">David<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">From: <a
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">
mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of
Avri Doria<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Sent: Thursday, January 29,
2015 6:27 PM<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To: Accountability Cross
Community<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] The
big test of effective accountability<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Hi,<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
And unfortunately they ignored the ASEP recommendations. The ASEP was
recommended by ATRT1, and its recommendations have been recommend by ATRT2
for the committee working on Accountability it recommended - ie. us.<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
The fact that those recommendations lingered is indeed why we need the
binding bits.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
So often we come close, yet at the last minute we let something go undone
and the work gets lost.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Stuff like this needs fixing.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">avri<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On 29-Jan-15 17:37, Kieren
McCarthy wrote:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">I don't like this line
about the Reconsideration Committee not being "understood",
Chris.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">ICANN's staff and Board
have developed the rules by which the committee acts and the way in which it
decides to apply those rules. Those rules have also changed over time. <o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">This is part of the problem
- ICANN corporate lives within its own world half the time. I can recall
several conversations I had with ICANN's general counsel when on staff
where he presented me with an entirely different perspective on critical
matters to the one that I and much of the community felt existed. <o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">There is an internal body of
belief that stands in stark contrast to the outside view. And that body of
belief is consciously shielded.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">If ICANN wants the
Reconsideration Committee to stop being misunderstood, it should rename it
the "Policy Process Double-checking Committee".<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Or, alternatively, and
preferably, changing the functioning of the committee to actually
"reconsider" decisions. And include people other than Board
members (one of the accountability recommendations made many years ago but
never implemented).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Kieren<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 1:59
PM, Chris Disspain <<a href="mailto:ceo@auda.org.au">ceo@auda.org.au</a>
> wrote:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Agree Avri. And whilst the
reconsideration request process is widely pilloried it does, in fact,
provide a level of accountability. It may not be understood, it may not
provide the sort of or level of accountability that is desirable but, I for
one, would want it to be improved/expanded rather than see it disappear as
in a [very] narrow band of cases it does work.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Cheers,<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Chris<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On 30 Jan 2015, at 08:34 ,
Avri Doria <<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org">avri@acm.org</a>> wrote:<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Hi,<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
I think Zero is a wee bit hyperbolic.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
I believe that the AOC does provide for accountability in the ATRT
reviews.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">We also vote on some Board
seats and people have lost their seats. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Too slow and not as good as a recall procedure, but accountabilty.<o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Nomcom also does not always
renew terms, <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">even if the people want them
too. <o:p> </o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
That is also accountability.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">The IRT can also provide
accountability. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
and does.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">It is true none of these
bind the board, <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">and that needs fixing, <o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
but I strongly disagree with the statement that there is no
accountability.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Sure, none are as stringent
as taking out <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">and executing at dawn
(I've been catching up on Marco Polo on Netflix) <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">but they are accountability,
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
though of a lesser degree.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">avri<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On 29-Jan-15 14:14, Jonathan
Zuck wrote:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Kieren,<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">That hard truth here is that
while we endeavor to list existing “accountability” mechanisms,
there are, in fact, none. It’s a complete red herring to explore them
as part of this process. There are plenty of opportunities to
“vent” but there are, in fact, ZERO accountability mechanisms in
place, with the exception often cited but ridiculous “elect a
different board.” No one wants to hear that but it’s the truth.
Our goal here, in the near term is essentially to create ONE mechanism of
accountability in place, perhaps two. It is my sincere belief that the
presence of even a singleaccountability mechanism will go a long way to
change the culture inside ICANN because the net result will be to turn the
light back on the community to reach consensus. This is a GROSS
oversimplification, not meant to inspire nit picking but a return to the
task at hand which is to create a framework for reform which, if the
community remains motivated, will allow major cultural changes to take
place.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">JZ<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">From: Kieren McCarthy [<a
href="mailto:kierenmccarthy@gmail.com"> mailto:kierenmccarthy@gmail.com</a>]
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Sent: Thursday, January 29,
2015 1:57 PM<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To: McAuley, David<o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Cc: Jonathan Zuck;
Accountability Cross Community<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] The
big test of effective accountability<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">One more thing from me and
then I'll shut up.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">I'd be interested to
hear from people that have actually gone through the various accountability
mechanisms what they thought of the experience. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">For example:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">* Were you happy with the
process?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">* Were you happy with the
outcome?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">* Did you feel your points
were understand and considered?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">* What would have improved
the process for you?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">* If you lost, why did you
not progress further in the appeal process?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">This kind of feedback should
be being done by ICANN itself but I'm willing to bet it hasn't been.
It's also not that hard to do: their names are publicly available. ICANN
has all their contact details. I bet many of them would be happy to
talk.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Kieren<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 9:58
AM, McAuley, David <<a href="mailto:dmcauley@verisign.com">
dmcauley@verisign.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Hi Kieran,<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Thank you for this
human-element discussion, most interesting and helpful for me.<o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">I differ with one remark you
made in the last post: “yes, the Board can be overruled but only on
issues of process.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">It’s actually not all
that positive, if I have things correctly concerning accountability measures
within the ICANN environment (not addressing courts here).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">At present the board can be
overruled in reconsideration requests – but only by the board itself
on, as you say, process issues. This probably does not meet any realistic,
objective accountability standard.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">In IRP before independent
panels, the board can take the panel’s decision or leave it – it
is nothing more than a recommendation, again on process-based issues.<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">The IRP panel in the
DotConnectAfrica (DCA) Trust case ruled that it could bind ICANN in a
procedural ruling this past year, but ICANN’s subsequent arguments
before the same panel as well as other IRP panels indicate that it does not
accept that decision. It could be interesting to see what ICANN does with
the eventual final ruling in the case, depending on whether the panel rules
in DCA’s favor. .<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">David McAuley<o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">From: <a
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [mailto:<a
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of Kieren
McCarthy<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Sent: Thursday, January 29,
2015 11:17 AM<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
To: Jonathan Zuck<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Cc: Accountability Cross
Community<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] The
big test of effective accountability<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Quick thoughts on this: <o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Yes, what the staff and
Board end up doing is partly the community's fault.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Where I do place fault is in
both continuing to do so, and failing to make changes despite clear signs
that it is not working effectively and is even damaging trust.<o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">The Board seem confused and
frustrated that they continue to be yelled at. The community can't
believe that the Board still hasn't heard them. I think the gap is the
lack of human judgement and the priority of process and legal argument.<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">I am a big fan of solid
changes over long discourse. But what I started to see on this group was a
tendency toward process solutions and legal-style decision making.<o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Just one example: yes, the
Board can be overruled but only on issues of process. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">This just creates one more
layer and process that ICANN will hold up as accountability and the
community will be completely dissatisfied with.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">ICANN's staff will
defend to the hilt the Board's initial decision, creating a fight and
tension, limiting discussion and sharing of information, increasing
distrust, reinforcing the barrier between Corporate and community. <o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">And this is the big change
we introduce this time around.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">My fear is that unless we
break that habit, there will be another 10 years of dissatisfaction and
another group like this one trying again to bring 'accountability'
in 2025.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Kieren<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">-<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">[sent through phone]<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 7:35
AM, Jonathan Zuck <<a href="mailto:JZuck@actonline.org">
JZuck@actonline.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">I’m somewhat hesitant
to speak up given Malcolm’s excellent treatise but a few things spring
to mind. The first and simplest is that process still provides a structure
the re-humanization you seek. In a large organization if there isn’t a
way to trigger the group “rethinking” an issue, it will never
happen. I believe that while this conversation is emotionally
rewarding, we need to be very careful to stay inside our remit to come up
with some very specific recommendations for increasing accountability (in a
legal sense) to replace the somewhat “legal” accountability that
exists today so my first inclination is to table this discussion and get
back to work.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">My second inclination is to
dive in <g> and to come to the defense of the board and ICANN staff a
little bit. The buzzing in the back of my head for the past year or so is
that the “community” is partially to blame for the environment
in which we find ourselves. ICANN is afraid of litigation because we
are litigious. The board does our job for us often because we have failed to
do it ourselves.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">If the result of a policy
development process is a failure to find consensus, to compromise, to be
“human” as you suggest Kieren, the board is faced with the
unenviable task of playing Solomon because the community have essentially
abdicated our responsibility. The boards entire job is supposed to
ONLY be about process and whether we’ve followed it. Instead, we
present the board with unfinished work, expect them to “rule” on
it and threaten to sue if we don’t get our way. If the board is guilty
of anything in this context, it is their willingness to accept this
challenge, which I suggest is dehumanizing because, like Solomon, they are
not in the best position to find a solution and often create arbitrary
compromise which is the number one characteristic of an arbitration
environment. More often than not, the board should simply reject the
unfinished work and send it back to the community to get it done right. So I
think there’s a lot to Kieren’s concern but I think the
community plays a significant role in the problem and must therefore play a
significant role in the solution and I’m ready for us to tackle
it.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">All that said, it’s
not really relevant to the task at hand. Obviously this whole situation has
us “<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omphaloskepsis">navel
gazing</a>,” and that’s not all bad but we do have a very
specific task to accomplish in the here and now and we would do well to
focus on that alone, at least for the time being.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">My two cents<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Jonathan<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">From: <a
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a
href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">
mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of
Kieren McCarthy<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Sent: Thursday, January 29,
2015 9:39 AM<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To: Malcolm Hutty<o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Cc: Accountability Cross
Community<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] The
big test of effective accountability<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Like this. Excellent food
for thought. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Will dig out Steve's
mission email - had completely missed it. You have the email header
handy?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Kieren<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">-<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">[sent through phone]<o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 6:00 AM, Malcolm Hutty <<a
href="mailto:malcolm@linx.net">malcolm@linx.net</a>> wrote:<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On 29/01/2015 11:45, Bruce
Tonkin wrote: <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
> In terms of reviewing the new gTLD program <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Kieren may correct me, but I
read his essay as being about more than <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">just the gTLD program alone,
albeit that that was the example given. I <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">read it as a general
complaint that ICANN tends to be to formalistic, <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">and loses sight of the
substance of the issue, not only in gTLD <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">applications, but often. And
I think that he's far from alone in that <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">view, especially amongst
those who engage with ICANN peripherally rather <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
than intensively. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> I compare this to a
jury process in the legal system. I don’t think <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> you can just ask for
another jury to hear the case when the first <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> jury finds against you.
There needs to be some basis for the appeal <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> other than that you
disagree with the initial finding. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">[...] <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> So careful work is
needed to ensure that we have a process that <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> ensures independent
reviews of decisions, and also appropriate <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
> criteria to initiate a review of a decision. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
There I think you get to the heart of the matter. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Kieren's complaint about
formalism is interesting insofar as it goes, <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">and I think it is a very
useful contribution, but it is only identifies <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">a problem, it doesn't
analyse it or propose a solution. I would like to <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
try to work from where Kieren left off. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Kieren, you're a
journalist. You live and breathe five-Ws and an H. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Let's apply that here. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">WHAT's the problem?
(Excessive legal formalism, resulting in loss of <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
sight of the substance of the question). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
WHY do we have that problem? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
WHO caused it and who can address that? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
HOW should it be addressed? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
(OK, I'm leaving out "when". Cut me some slack.)<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
WHY do we have the excessive legalistic formalism Kieren complains about?
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To some extent, this is
characteristic of all large bureaucracies. They <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">are instinctively defensive,
and any individual within them wants to <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">show that they discharged
their own responsibilities properly even - <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">perhaps especially - when
they don't, as an individual, necessarily <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
agree personally with the organisation position. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">But Kieren suggests that
ICANN is particularly susceptible to this <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">tendency, and I think I
agree. An organisation with a highly empowered <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">single leader (think Apple
under Steve Jobs) can cut through process <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
easily. I imagine an early conversation at Apple going like this: <o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Product Manager: We
assembled focus groups in all our major target <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">markets to identify the key
characteristics of a <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">revolutionary, magical new
phone. We planted the best <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">UI theorists in those
groups, to guide them towards <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">characteristics and away
from mere features. We then <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">tested the output with
surveys from the best polling <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">companies, scientifically
designed to ensure all user <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">groups had balanced
representation. Using their <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">answers we ranked and
prioritised development goals. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">We hired the best and
brightest designers to deliver <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">against that design brief,
and I proudly present, <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
the You-Phone. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Steve Jobs: The user
experience sucks and it feels like it was <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
designed by a committee. Go back and start again.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Would we want ICANN to work
like this? No! We'd be rightly terrified of <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">leaving that much power in
one person's hands. We want ICANN to be run <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">by the community, with the
Board acting as an arm of the community <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
conducting executive oversight, not ruled by any single Global King of DNS.
<o:p> </o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">So we create structures
designed to ensure that everybody's voice is <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">heard and that
everybody's interests are taken into account, that <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">competing positions are
balanced as fairly as it is possible to be, and <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">that decisions are
demonstrably rationally arrived at on the basis of <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">previously agreed consensus
policy. And we create more structures to <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">appeal cases to on the basis
that any of those things failed in this <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
instance. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
And we end up with the legalistic formalism of which Kieren speaks. <o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Why? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">I suggest that it is because
we have such a diverse community, and so <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">the only thing we agree on
is the process criteria. We agree that <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">everybody should be heard.
We agree that there should be periods of <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">public comment, and then
further periods of reply comment. We agree that <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">policy should require
consensus support. But we're so anxious that that <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">might be the only thing we
agree on that we stop there. And so when a <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">decision looks bad, the only
thing we have to fall back on is an appeal <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
to process. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">And mostly the process was
followed (at least in a narrow sense) so it's <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">very hard to reverse the
decision, even if you might like to (as Bruce <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">has described). And the
dissatisfied party becomes embroiled in an <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">increasingly embittered
proxy fight with an increasingly defensive <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">bureaucracy, when everybody
knows that the gravamen of the complaint <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">isn't really about
process at all, it is, as Kieren says, about the <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
substance. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Some would say this means we
need to "unshackle" the Board, to give them <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">a wide-ranging and broad
discretion to "do the right thing", or <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">sometimes "to take
decision based in the public interest". Removing or <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">reducing external
constraints would enable "effective leadership" and <o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">give the Board
"flexibility to respond to a changing world" without <o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
being "buried in legal challenges". <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">I consider such an approach
to be a trap. Those arguments are the same <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">arguments one would make if
an avowed enemy of community accountability. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Following such
recommendations will lead inevitably to a Board with a <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">top-down, paternalistic view
of governing the community at best, if not <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
something even worse. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Instead, let us look to
other I* communities, which do not seem to have <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">the same problem, to see how
the IETF and the RIRs maintain genuine <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">bottom-up community
governance, and at the same time remain focused on <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
the substance. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Let me tell a story about
how one of the RIRs recently dealt with a <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
potentially difficult problem. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Towards the end of last
year, on the mailing list for the RIPE NCC, a <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Ukrainian who seemed to be a
partisan of the government in Kiev, and an <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">opponent of the regime in
Crimea and Donetsk, raised a point about the <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">rules. RIPE NCC rules say
that organisations applying from IP addresses <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">must supply government
issued ID, he said. Why does the RIPE NCC <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">continue to serve users in
Crimea? Does the RIPE NCC accept the validity <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">of the Donetsk regime? On
what basis and with what justification? Surely <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">the only proper course is
for the RIPE NCC to cease to support <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">organisations in Crimea
until the legitimately recognised government of <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Ukraine is restored in the
region (I am using his voice, you understand, <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
not my own, but this is a paraphrase, not a direct quote). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">The RIPE community
immediately saw this intervention for what it was in <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">substance: an attempt to
embroil the RIPE NCC in the ongoing regional <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">conflict, on the side to
which he was partisan. It was not really a <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">genuine enquiry about the
rules, it was an attempt to force a legalistic <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
interpretation that would subvert their intended substance. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">And the RIPE community
responded swiftly, vocally, and overwhelmingly of <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">one view. The mission of
RIPE NCC is to support users by helping to <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">coordinate the distribution
of IP addresses to those that need them. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Networks in Crimea need IP
addresses. This does not change because the <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">legitimacy of the claimed
government with effective control of the <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">region is disputed. Many
members of the RIPE Community had considerable <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">sympathy with the Ukrainian
partisan, and deep personal opposition to <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Russian intervention in
Eastern Ukraine. Nonetheless, they agreed on one <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">thing: the geopolitics of
the Ukraine is not the responsibility of the <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">RIPE NCC. The rule requiring
government issued ID is there to support <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">RIPE NCC's mission to
coordination IP address distribution so that <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">networks are allocated the
address space they require (so that RIPE NCC <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">can identify the entities to
which it has made allocations); to apply <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">the same rule to prevent IP
address block allocation would be to subvert <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">the mission. While there is
no universally recognised government in <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Eastern Ukraine, the RIPE
NCC should accept such ID from entities in <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
that area as they are reasonably able to provide. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">This story, I think,
exemplifies the ability to cut to the substance of <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">the issue that Kieren seeks.
How is it arrived at? Not by the <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">introduction of any strong
central leader: the NCC staff and Board was <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">almost silent while this
discussion played out amongst the community. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">It was arrived at because
the community had a strongly unified sense of <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">its own limited mission (to
support the distribution of IP addresses to <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">those that need them,
through coordinated allocation policies) and the <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">members of that community
were overwhelmingly willing to set aside their <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">own views on a matter
outside the scope of that mission when it was <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">suggested that some other
reasoning requires an effect fundamentally <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">contrary to the mission. We
will not have an argument about whether RIPE <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">NCC should act to /limit/
the allocation of IP addresses to entities in <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Crimea, not even dressed in
the coat of a rules interpretation. Maybe <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">action should be taken
against the regime in Crimea - but not by RIPE <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">NCC. RIPE NCC will discharge
its own mission, and leave the geopolitics <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
to others. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Is this not the same culture we want to inculcate in ICANN? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">I believe that story
exemplifies the strength of the RIRs, and describes <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
exactly what we want from ICANN too. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
And it is very far from the ICANN Kieren describes. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
WHO can bring this change about? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Only us. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">When we look to Kieren's
complaint, and see how far short ICANN falls of <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">the strong culture shows by
the RIRs and the IETF, the "fault" lies with <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">us, the community. We
don't *want* the Board, or the CEO, or the staff <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">to come up with a
dramatically developed version of the ICANN Mission <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">that will then overrule
existing processes and policies. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
The Mission must be developed by, and founded in, the community itself. <o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">What we need is for the
community to develop a much clearer idea of the <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Mission, and an exposition
of what that means and how it is to be <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">applied. Then all the
accountability structures we create, the Review <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Boards and Reconsideration
Panels and Ombudsmen and the rest, they will <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">have a proper standard for
review. Not a sterile standard that looks <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">only to bare process, but
one that asks "Is this consistent with the <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
fundamental mission?" <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Consider how this might work in practice. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">For .gay, there are many
objections one might make. One might say the <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">proposed registrar was not
suitable - but that should only lead to the <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">selection of an alternative,
or the imposition of tighter control, not <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">to refusal to delegate. If
you're not confident in the registrar you <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">might impose behavioural
controls (e.g. to prevent limitation of supply) <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">or structural controls (e.g.
a shorter contract, to require renunciation <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">of any presumption of
renewal of the registry contract etc) or some <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">combination of the two.
There will be plenty of room for arguments about <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
the best way to proceed. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">But arguments that resolve
to (or are recognisable as a mere pretext <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">for) the claim that .gay
ought not to exist can be dismissed: ICANN's <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
mission is to make domains available, not to prevent their availability.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
I promised a HOW. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Here is HOW I think we should proceed. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">In our Frankfurt
face-to-face we constructed, yet again, a map of <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">possible new structures, and
most of the focus went on that. But there <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">was also a slot on it for
the question of clarifying the mission, as the <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">basis for review. A few
weeks ago, on this list, Steve DelBianco made a <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">very valuable start,
suggesting a new codification of the mission. That <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
contribution has passed almost without notice. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">I don't necessarily
think Steve's formulation is perfect, but it's a lot <o:p></o:p>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">better than anything else
I've yet seen, and it has the virtue of being <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">a contribution on this
critical subject, almost alone. Let us work <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">together on that, to build
that common shared sense of Mission. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Not an infinitely broad
Mission, intended to allow any possible action <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">in an unknowable future, but
a narrow mission, intended to guide, to <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">help make decisions which
are choices, that can, as Bruce says, act as a <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
meaningful criterion for review of decisions. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Let us have the courage to
believe we can build a strong consensus on a <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">meaningfully limited
mission, not merely on narrow questions of process. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">If we can succeed in that,
we can succeed in creating an ICANN that is <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">meaningfully accountable to
the community on matters of essential <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
substance, not merely failures of process. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Kind Regards, <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Malcolm. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">-- <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Malcolm Hutty | tel: <a
href="x-msg://520/tel:%2B44%2020%207645%203523"> +44 20 7645 3523</a><o:p>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Head of Public Affairs |
Read the LINX Public Affairs blog <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
London Internet Exchange | <a href="http://publicaffairs.linx.net/">
http://publicaffairs.linx.net/</a> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">London Internet Exchange Ltd
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Company Registered in
England No. 3137929 <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">
_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<o:p> </o:p></div>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<o:p> </o:p></div>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org"><o:p></o:p></a>
</pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">
<span class="MsoHyperlink"><a
href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a></span><o:p></o:p></pre>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<o:p> </o:p></div>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">
<o:p> </o:p></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">
<a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">
<o:p></o:p></a></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:.5in">
<span class="MsoHyperlink"><a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
</span><o:p></o:p></pre>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><o:p> </o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">
_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a
href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">
_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a
href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">
_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a
href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
<a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal"><br />
<br />
_______________________________________________<br />
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br />
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br />
<a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body></html>