[council] Regarding topics for open discussion amongst SOs and ACs
Gomes, Chuck
cgomes at verisign.com
Thu Sep 3 15:39:25 UTC 2009
It seems to me that there are two fundamental questions that need to be
answered with regard to accountability:
1. Accountable to whom?
2. Accountable for what?
I think a very interesting discussion could take place discussing those two
questions.
Chuck
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org
> [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
> Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 11:23 AM
> To: Tim Ruiz; GNSO Council
> Subject: Re: [council] Regarding topics for open discussion
> amongst SOs and ACs
>
> The discussion could even be an attempt to define what each
> stakeholder means by accountability. There are no doubt as
> many different takes on what it actually means as there are
> organisations willing to take part in the joint AC/SO session...
>
> Stéphane
>
>
> Le 03/09/09 17:03, « Tim Ruiz » <tim at godaddy.com> a écrit :
>
> >
> >> I would not side-step taking on the question of "accountability to
> >> governments" just because people find it odious. Actually, I think
> >> that's a good reason to take it on.
> >
> > It will no doubt be on the minds of the GAC, if they decide to
> > participate. So defining what is meant by accountability by various
> > stakeholders may be a good way to start the discussion.
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: Re: [council] Regarding topics for open discussion amongst
> > SOs and ACs
> > From: William Drake <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>
> > Date: Thu, September 03, 2009 5:19 am
> > To: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>
> > Cc: "Council GNSO" <council at gnso.icann.org>
> >
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > On Sep 3, 2009, at 12:32 AM, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Hello Tim,
> >>
> >>> But my suggestion is that the topic be Accountability.
> >>
> >> That would certainly be useful at some point. There have
> indeed been
> >> some proposals that were prepared by a President's advisory
> >> committee, but there hasn't really been an open community
> discussion
> >> on the topic at an ICANN meeting. The topic seems to get more
> >> discussion at USA hearings on the JPA, and IGF discussion forums
> >> under the topic of Internet Governance generally.
> >
> > NCUC strongly favors making accountability the focus, inter
> alia for
> > the reasons Bruce mentions. Moreover, it's probably a more
> effective
> > counterproposal to the GAC than malicious conduct.
> >>
> >> Part of the issue is defining what is meant by
> accountability by the
> >> various parties raising that issue.
> >>
> >> Do they mean accountable to a Government or Governments,
> or do they
> >> mean accountability to the ICANN community - ie accountable to
> >> "members' in some way? Sometimes it seems to me that parties mean
> >> accountable to someone that they can influence :-)
> >
> > Defining the topic narrowly will inevitably leave some
> parties feeling
> > that their chief concerns about accountability are not being
> > addressed. It would be better to have a structured discussion that
> > addresses the different dimensions in turn. And in this context
> > (probably this is a rather orthogonal view), given the
> larger global
> > political debates---not only on JPA and in the IGF, but also in
> > intergovernmental settings like CSTD/ECOSOC and the ITU (where the
> > secretariat and quite a lot of governments are getting pretty
> > aggressive about expanding its role in many aspects of Internet
> > governance)---I would not side-step taking on the question of
> > "accountability to governments" just because people find it odious.
> > Actually, I think that's a good reason to take it on.
> >
> > On Sep 2, 2009, at 2:10 AM, Adrian Kinderis wrote:
> >
> >> I am sick and tired of the GAC throwing stones from a distance and
> >> not getting their hands dirty.
> >
> > So let's suggest a topic on which they would feel compelled to get
> > their hands dirty, and thrash it out.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5484 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20090903/49c794b1/smime.p7s>
More information about the council
mailing list