<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"><tr><td valign="top"><div>It appears as if the email regarding the ombudsman "getting a spanking" has a measure of truth to it, but only in regards to its candor in correctly defining the ombudsman position as a mediator. The open mocking of the inability to deter direct insults helps establish, and also bring to light, the "inside the beltway corporate culture", flourishing and in control of ICANN, while the transition process is still not completed, like a golden cow that is endlessly milked.<br /><br />ICANN has existed for almost 20 years, think about how sad it is that 20 years after Bill Clinton signed the order to transition the internet, the ICANN's community hasn't agreed on a transition plan. Meanwhile, the Ombudsman position can't defend multistakeholderism for new interested "regular" people, so instead excuses are made for the bullying, even when those people openly bully the Ombudsman
position, saying he can "know the use of the paddle". <br /><br />The ICANN multistakeholder model is supposed to be about anyone interested joining and participating, but the inside the beltway culture is designed to keep unknown people out of their party, out of their game. On June 22, 2015 the Ombudsman position issued a plea for civil discourse, and the only thing he can do after that failed plea, in my opinion, is to stop defending the multistakeholder process altogether in the hope that more power is given to the ombudsman position. The real reality of ICANN's multistakeholder process at this time is that not enough people can or will openly defend multistakeholderism, while the ombudsman position at ICANN is a deterrant that stopped deterring. <br /><br />The jig is up, "credential based bullying" of new participants is the proven rule here, a rule which just wasn't properly discussed. This mailing list is as "inside the beltway" as any
corporation on this planet, pretending as best as it can to be inclusive. The multistakeholder process future world is the best future model there is, as long as you can keep it, once it is regained (if it ever existed in its truest form), and as long as it doesn't succumb to credential based bullying again, a future world based on participation and ideas, not trading business cards.<br /><br />Ron</div></td></tr></table> <div id="_origMsg_">
<div>
<br />
<div>
<div style="font-size:0.9em">
<hr size="1">
<b>
<span style="font-weight:bold">From:</span>
</b>
Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el@lisse.NA>; <br>
<b>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To:</span>
</b>
accountability-cross-community@icann.org <accountability-cross-community@icann.org>; <br>
<b>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Cc:</span>
</b>
Lisse Eberhard <directors@omadhina.net>; <br>
<b>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</span>
</b>
[CCWG-ACCT] Alleged racism against silicon based life forms <br>
<b>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</span>
</b>
Fri, Oct 16, 2015 9:40:48 AM <br>
</div>
<br>
<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top">Dear Co-Chairs,<br clear="none"><br clear="none">In terms of Roelof Meijer's request for meaningful subject lines:<br clear="none"><br clear="none">It appears from the below post of the troll posting from the<br clear="none">email account <a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:ron.baione@yahoo.com" href="javascript:return">ron.baione@yahoo.com</a> that we we must stop all CCWG<br clear="none">related work, IMMEDIATELY, to allow the Ombudsman to determine<br clear="none">whether the troll is indeed a silicon based life form.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Even though he alleges to have been labelled a "silicone based life<br clear="none">form", which he was not.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">If the troll were to be found a silicon based life form he would<br clear="none">have a point as the ICANN rules of behavior state<br clear="none"><br clear="none"> Those who
take part in ICANN multi-stakeholder process,<br clear="none"> including Board, staff and all those involved in Supporting<br clear="none"> Organization and Advisory Committee councils, undertake to:<br clear="none"><br clear="none"> [...]<br clear="none"> Treat all members of the ICANN community EQUALLY,<br clear="none"> irrespective of nationality, gender, racial or ethnic<br clear="none"> origin, religion or beliefs, disability, age, or sexual<br clear="none"> orientation;<br clear="none"><br clear="none"> members of the ICANN community SHOULD treat each other with<br clear="none"> civility both face to face and online.<br clear="none"> [...]<br clear="none"><br clear="none">If the investigation turned out that the below troll indeed is a<br clear="none">silicon based life form I am sure Mr Roberts will be most willing to<br clear="none">be called to the Ombudsman's Office for a
spanking. As will I, even<br clear="none">though anyone familiar with my background knows I am not the Captain<br clear="none">of Team Caucasian.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">The Ombudsman is around, he has a Commonwealth education, so I am<br clear="none">sure he is familiar with the paddle.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none">As for the second part of the rule, and even though civility is<br clear="none">defined as<br clear="none"><br clear="none"> formal politeness and courtesy in behavior or speech<br clear="none"><br clear="none">with emphasis of FORMAL, hence, just directing any remarks through<br clear="none">the (Co-)Chair(s) complies with that already, referring to a troll<br clear="none">as a troll most definitively is not impolite:<br clear="none"><br clear="none"> <a shape="rect" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll</a><br
clear="none"><br clear="none">In particular if the troll referred to as a troll is a troll,<br clear="none">whether carbon or silicon based.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">greetings, el<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none"><div class="yqt9070213584" id="yqtfd42486"><br clear="none">On 2015-10-16 09:46 , Roelof Meijer wrote:<br clear="none">> Dear mr. Baloney,<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> I, probably like quite a few others on this list, fail to see the<br clear="none">> link between your message below and the subject of this thread<br clear="none">> (“Meeting location”).<br clear="none">> During our last CCWG call, I commented on the number of emails we<br clear="none">> all have to deal with and the fact that practically in every mail<br clear="none">> thread of this group, there’s growing divergence between the<br clear="none">> title of the thread and the content of submissions of some as the<br
clear="none">> discussion proceeds. A factor that makes it very difficult for<br clear="none">> the reader to just read those emails that are worth the time.<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> I would greatly appreciate it if you would stick to the good<br clear="none">> practice of ensuring that the content of your message is aligned<br clear="none">> with subject specified in the header.<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> Best,<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> Roelof Meijer<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> From: <<a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" href="javascript:return">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> on behalf of<br clear="none">> Ron Baione <<a shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:ron.baione@yahoo.com" href="javascript:return">ron.baione@yahoo.com</a>><br clear="none">> Date: vrijdag 16 oktober 2015 01:45<br
clear="none">[...]<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> It's not a policy on polite discourse if it is not enforced,<br clear="none">> especially when someone can be directly, publicly insulted without<br clear="none">> any fear of the Ombusdmans ability to enforce that policy. It is<br clear="none">> clear that after being publicly referred to impolitely and<br clear="none">> unfairly objectified as a "troll", an "it", "a silicone based<br clear="none">> lifeform", labeled as "hostile", and told to "give it a rest"<br clear="none">> simply for trying to participate and share new ideas, there is no<br clear="none">> actual ability for the Ombudsman to enforce the policy being<br clear="none">> referred to.<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> The very fact that the Ombusdman already sent a note previously<br clear="none">> asking members of this list to follow
the policy on polite<br clear="none">> discourse, prior to my being assigned as a participant to<br clear="none">> CCWG-Accountability, shows me that there has long needed to be<br clear="none">> some sort of special review of the comments made by members of<br clear="none">> this mailing list to see if there is a atmosphere of disrespect<br clear="none">> that for some reason has evolved over a lengthy period of time.<br clear="none">> After such a review of the distractions, the real work of<br clear="none">> completing the ICANN transition process will be more successful in<br clear="none">> my opinion. Can the Ombudsman comment on this proposal and/or<br clear="none">> perform such a review?<br clear="none">> <br clear="none">> Ron<br clear="none">[...]<br clear="none"></div></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>