[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] FW: Board message to the CCWG-AP

Mathieu Weill mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
Mon Mar 6 07:35:38 UTC 2017


Dear Colleagues,

it’s very helpful to get input from the Board early in the process.

I have the same question as Daniel's, regarding the sixth statement :
“Sixth, to avoid conflicts of interest, there should be clear separation
of those deciding general direction, those choosing specific projects and
those receiving the funds.”

Does that relate to the proposed framework our group will recommend, or to
the way we organize our deliberations ?

Thanks in advance
Best
Mathieu

-----Message d'origine-----
De : ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org
[mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org] De la part de Daniel
Dardailler
Envoyé : dimanche 5 mars 2017 20:17
À : jrobinson at afilias.info
Cc : ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
Objet : Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] FW: Board message to the CCWG-AP

Hello all

Thanks for this input. I have a question regarding this sentence:

> Sixth, to avoid conflicts of interest, there should be clear
> separation of those deciding general direction, those choosing
> specific projects and those receiving the funds.

The need for separation is obvious between the granters and the grantees,
but those deciding on the general directions, the strategic plan, have no
reason to be excluded from either becoming experts in project proposal
evaluation, or being authors of specific proposals themselves.

The strategic plan in the large R&D framework programs of the EC for
instance, are always done by EU experts in the field (who else can analyze
the right future strategy ?), in public forum, through consensus, and this
doesn't prevent them from applying later on, or being an expert in
specific calls to judge proposals.

The rationales are that the general directions are always consensual and
general enough to encompass many potential project domains, in each
directions.

This CWG is tasked to come up with general directions for the funding, in
a way that does good for the Internet and that is more or less (TBD)
aligned with the ICANN mission.

Clearly, the people capable of solving this equation are already experts
in ICANN and Internet goodness, or they wouldn't be here, so it's very
likely that they are already doing the sort of job the auction funding
will help.

And if we ask them to leave the CWG for this reason, they'll have to be
replaced with folks that may have no idea of what is good for the Internet
and ICANN, since they don't practice.

Can we clarify this point ?














_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds


More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list