[CWG-Stewardship] ICANN Board as "regulator" (was: A liaison from the Board to CWG)

[Milton L Mueller]

I'll have to disagree with that Alan. There has been a clear separation between the CWG and CCWG precisely because the problems of IANA accountability and ICANN's "other stuff" - which is 99.9% policy making - are so different. Why would we have created two distinct working groups and given the CWG an explicit mandate to pay attention to the accountability of the IANA functions if the CCWG was intended to cover it all?

--MM

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Greenberg [mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca]
> Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2015 7:47 PM
> To: Milton L Mueller; Andrew Sullivan; cwg-stewardship at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] ICANN Board as "regulator" (was: A liaison
> from the Board to CWG)
> 
> NO! The CCWG is working on internal ICANN accountability reforms with
> regard to whatever ICANN is doing, which may include the IANA function if
> that continues, through whatever means, to be in its purview.
> 
> Alan
> 
> At 21/02/2015 07:00 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> 
> >CCWG is working on internal ICANN accountability reforms that relate to
> >the policy making function.