<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">Dear Jordan:</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; min-height: 17px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">Thankyou. I have read your draft issues Analysis Table.</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">I must say that I find that this is not a very constructive approach to the matter.</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; min-height: 17px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">After many years' experience with the GAC and At Large and a reasonable background in ccTLD matters, I do not recognise the 'Issues' as described.</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; min-height: 17px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">I would also be concerned that the drafting of some of the 'Impacts' might suggest conflicts, hostility and insecurity, without justification. </div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">Furthermore, it will always be difficult to base an evidence-based policy on 'unexpressed concerns'.</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; min-height: 17px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">More generally, I assume that your SA WG will develop recommendations which take account of the mutual rights and responsibilities that arise from ICANN's contracts with the staff.</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">Also, in the event of complaints from members of the community, are existing procedures satisfactory?</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">Do the SA WG's proposals respect confidentiality and the rights of individual complainants and members of the staff?</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; min-height: 17px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">Alternatively, if asked, I might have suggested an entirely different approach:</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; "><b>Question:</b> which have been the principal failings of ICANN in recent years?</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">To what extent, if any, have the staff been responsible or complicit in sustaining proposals that have given rise to these failures?</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; min-height: 17px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">I can think of two areas where this hypothesis might be tested:</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; min-height: 17px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">1.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The new gTLD programme and specifically ignoring advice against vertical integration and failure to implement support for undeserved regions.</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; min-height: 17px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">2.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Longstanding refusal to address the fact that Whois breaches privacy laws in many jurisdictions, notably the EU. </div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; "> <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>(I gather this was discussed for the first time with data protection commissioners during ICANN58)</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; min-height: 17px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">So, you see, my list would be substantive, but short. And I would not pre-suppose any form of negligence or <i>manquement</i> on the part of the staff unless substantiated in a specific instance.</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; min-height: 17px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">I would not set up an enquiry which sets the staff up against the community, across the board.</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">Regards</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; min-height: 17px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">Christopher</div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; "><br></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 14px; ">PS:<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>I shall investigate the possibility of introducing these comments into your Google Doc, but I am not optimistic. Perhaps the staff could help me.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div>On 18 Apr 2017, at 02:34, Jordan Carter <<a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-size:12.8px">Dear CCWG participants, </span><div style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8px">The Staff Accountability subgroup has been following the changed approach to our work we agreed together in Copenhagen at ICANN 58. </div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8px">We now need some input from you, and we hope you can offer some thoughts. This is *not* a First Reading request, it is a request for you to share some experience you may or may not have with us over the next week or so.</div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8px">In dealing with the staff accountability subject, we are in a "problem identification" phase. We are trying to understand and log the challenges or concerns people have with staff accountability matters. </div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8px">With each issue identified, we are identifying CONTRIBUTIONS to that issue (i.e. what is making it an issue / problem); and IMPACTS of that issue (what are the consequences of the issue, what effect does it have on the ICANN system?).</div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8px">Once we know the set of issues, we'll start working on ways to solve them. But being clear about the issues or problems is the first step, and where we are now.</div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><b>Please review the table attached (.pdf or .docx), or in Google docs, at </b><<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/12ihFgBE5lcVTfiL6wft9MsOqHaSSKnzIDd1utROosNU/edit?usp=sharing" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/<wbr>document/d/<wbr>12ihFgBE5lcVTfiL6wft9MsOqHaSSK<wbr>nzIDd1utROosNU/edit?usp=<wbr>sharing</a>></div><div style="font-size:12.8px"><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>We would welcome your feedback on these particular points:</div><div><br></div><div>1. Are the issues identified so far issues which seem general, or are they based (to your knowledge) on one-off circumstances? [we should only try and solve systemic or recurring issues, not one-offs] </div><div><br></div><div>2. Are there issues not on the list that we should be thinking about? (If so, please add them as tracked changes in the google doc)</div><div><br></div><div>3. Are there other contributions to the issues in the list, or impacts from the issues, that you can add to make the table richer and more accurate? (if so, please add them as tracked changes in the google doc)</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Thanks for sharing your thinking with us over the next week or so. <b>It would be most helpful if you could add your thoughts in the Google doc rather than by email on the list. </b></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Avri Doria, Jordan Carter</div><div>Co-Rapporteurs, Staff Accountability, CCWG</div></div></div>
<span><2017-04-17-StaffAcct-IssuesAnalysisTable.docx></span><span><2017-04-17-StaffAcct-IssuesAnalysisTable.pdf></span>_______________________________________________<br>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community<br></blockquote></div><br></body></html>