<div>My thought on that statement is best summed up by this graphic... :)<br><img src="cid:14ea111ba424f7736231" style="width:568px; max-width:100%;"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 1:22 PM Avri Doria <<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org">avri@acm.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
<br>
And what I am saying is that it isn't a mistake, just a job not yet<br>
completed.<br>
<br>
avri<br>
<br>
<br>
On 17-Jul-15 22:15, Kieren McCarthy wrote:<br>
> What I am saying Avri is that we should not keep making the same<br>
> mistake over and over again.<br>
><br>
> And one of those mistakes is to continue to believe that a single<br>
> person can bring a decent level of accountability to ICANN. They<br>
> cannot. Especially when they are reliant on ICANN for doing their job<br>
> and getting paid.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Kieren<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Avri Doria <<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org" target="_blank">avri@acm.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org" target="_blank">avri@acm.org</a>>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> On 17-Jul-15 20:38, Kieren McCarthy wrote:<br>
> > > some personnel issues should remain confidential,<br>
> ><br>
> > I don't understand why people keep putting this strawman out<br>
> there. No<br>
> > one is suggesting, or indeed has ever suggested, that personnel<br>
> issues<br>
> > be included in a proper accountability mechanism.<br>
><br>
> True.<br>
><br>
> ><br>
> > > Why would a strengthened ombudsman not be a good fit for this<br>
> role?<br>
> ><br>
> > I'll give you three good reasons:<br>
> ><br>
> > 1. The Ombudsman was created in 2004. Despite numerous efforts<br>
> to make<br>
> > the role effective, it has never happened. Why keep making the same<br>
> > mistake?<br>
><br>
> Previous failure is not a mistake.<br>
> I believe we can succeed at doing this.<br>
><br>
> And the Ombudsman can get access to any information. It is uncertain<br>
> how much he can do with it at this point, but at least someone who is<br>
> trusted can look and can give testimony about the validity of<br>
> redactions.<br>
><br>
> Sure I would like to see ICANN live of to ATRT obligations, take<br>
> on CSR<br>
> seriously, have reasonable RR and stronger independent reviews and<br>
> audits &c., but we should not give up the partial successes<br>
> because they<br>
> are not right yet. WS2 will focus on strengthening the ombudsman role<br>
> and I think we can do it.<br>
><br>
> ><br>
> > 2. The Ombudsman is completely reliant on ICANN corporate. For<br>
> access<br>
> > to people and documents, for resources, for salary, for technical<br>
> > support, for logistical support, for an office, for a room at ICANN<br>
> > meetings, for everything except his own body. And his role and<br>
> what he<br>
> > can do is determined by ICANN's legal department in the rules that<br>
> > they wrote. The Ombudsman also signs a very strong confidentiality<br>
> > agreement with ICANN that effectively ties their hands on everything<br>
> > except illegal activity. See point 1.<br>
><br>
> Ombudsman in general are paid for by the company they work for. And<br>
> they often still have strong independence. Some even have power<br>
> to fix<br>
> things. We should fix the aspects of the ombudsman support that<br>
> need to<br>
> be fixed, we should not give up.<br>
><br>
> See response to point 1.<br>
><br>
> ><br>
> > 3. An Ombudsman is a single person. And one completely reliant on<br>
> > ICANN. This provides an enormous degree of control by ICANN and very<br>
> > little freedom for the accountability role the Ombusdsman is<br>
> supposed<br>
> > to fulfill. There are numerous people able to testify that ICANN<br>
> > corporate has no hesitation in applying significant pressure on<br>
> > individuals if they act in a way that it deemed a potential threat.<br>
> > All of those people are however under confidentiality agreements<br>
> with<br>
> > ICANN.<br>
> ><br>
><br>
> Actually we have an Ombudsman's office with 2 people in it.<br>
><br>
> It either needs to be fixed or we need to walk away from ICANN.<br>
> Some of<br>
> us have done so and are probably making a good living picking on<br>
> ICANN,<br>
> and some of us are thinking of walking away just to make a living<br>
> (volunteering is a difficult vocation). But those who do stay<br>
> need to<br>
> keep trying to fix it for as long as they do stay. And new people<br>
> come<br>
> to the effort all the time, determined to succeed where we fail.<br>
><br>
> For anyone who says ICANN never improves, I ask them to think back<br>
> to a<br>
> decade ago and compare. Problems there still are, but it is nowhere<br>
> near as bad as it once was. Could be a lot better, but also could be a<br>
> lot worse.<br>
><br>
> ><br>
> > The only way to bring actual accountability to ICANN is to have<br>
> people<br>
> > that are not dependent on ICANN and are not muzzled by<br>
> confidentiality<br>
> > agreements asking the questions.<br>
><br>
> True they are necessary. But they are only one part of the<br>
> story. They<br>
> need internal allies.<br>
> And it is my impression that though not as effective as he could have<br>
> been due to conditions you describe, the ombudsman has helped in many<br>
> cases. And does as much as possible to support the people who<br>
> need help.<br>
><br>
> > And those people are... the 2,000 people that turn up to ICANN<br>
> > meetings. The community.<br>
><br>
> Actually aren't most of them there to wheel and deal?<br>
> Only hundreds go to meetings dedicated to doing the policy stuff.<br>
><br>
> And they need the support of a strong ombudsman office.<br>
> and a CSR officer, and ...<br>
><br>
> That is what this process is all about.<br>
><br>
> avri<br>
><br>
><br>
> ---<br>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.<br>
> <a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.avast.com/antivirus</a><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a>><br>
> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
<br>
<br>
---<br>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.<br>
<a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.avast.com/antivirus</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
</blockquote></div>