[CCWG-Accountability] WS1 vs WS2 recap and proposals

[Giovanni Seppia]

+ 1

Giovanni


Giovanni Seppia
External Relations Manager

EURid
Woluwelaan 150
1831 Diegem - Belgium
TEL: +32 (0) 2 401 2750
MOB:+39 335 8141733
giovanni.seppia at eurid.eu<mailto:giovanni.seppia at eurid.eu>
http://www.eurid.eu<http://www.eurid.eu/>

<http://christmas2014.eurid.eu>
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
<https://www.facebook.com/EUregistry><https://www.facebook.com/EUregistry>
<https://www.facebook.com/EUregistry>

<https://www.facebook.com/EUregistry>
<https://www.facebook.com/EUregistry>
<https://www.facebook.com/EUregistry><https://www.facebook.com/EUregistry>
<https://www.facebook.com/EUregistry><https://www.facebook.com/EUregistry>
<https://www.facebook.com/EUregistry>
<https://www.facebook.com/EUregistry>



On 06 Jan 2015, at 14:08, Kieren McCarthy <kierenmccarthy at gmail.com<mailto:kierenmccarthy at gmail.com>> wrote:


> The current wording seems to assume
> there is some sort of default resistance

So many opportunitIes for a humorous dig here Bruce, but it's probably worth reflecting on the situation while we all consider accountability mechanisms designed for the next 10 years of ICANN.

It is remarkable that despite all the reviews and the numerous extensive accountability discussions and processes that a main topic on the community's mind is how to get the Board and staff to actually make changes. And, yes, I agree the wording does suggest a default resistance.

It is also noteworthy that your instinctive reaction is to simply want to change the wording rather than open up a discussion about why there is such a problematic gap between what the community feels and the Board believes it does.

To many things are done in ICANN by bending the words rather than making the change.

I think coming up with mechanisms that would pull ICANN in a different direction, one where the Board is seen as a reflector or advocate for community opinion rather than a blocking force, would be good and healthy for everyone across the board.


Kieren

-
[sent through phone]



On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 4:10 AM, Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au<mailto:Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>> wrote:

Hello All,


>> WS 1 is designated for accountability mechanisms that must be in place of rimly committed to before IANA transition occurs.
All other consensus items could be in WS2, provided there are mechanisms in WS1 adequate for force implementation of WS2 items despite resistance from Icann management and Board.

If possible I would like to see the last phrase read: "in case of resistance from ICANN Management and Board". The current wording seems to assume there is some sort of default resistance.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community


Disclaimer:
This email  and  any  attachment  hereto  is  intended  solely  for  the  person
to which  it  is  addressed  and  may  contain  confidential  and/or  privileged
information.  If you are not the intended recipient  or  if  you  have  received
this email in error, please delete it and  immediately  contact  the  sender  by
telephone or email, and destroy any copies  of  this  information.   You  should
not use or copy it, nor disclose  its  content  to  any  other  person  or  rely
upon this information.  Please note that any views presented in  the  email  and
any attachment hereto are solely those of the  author  and  do  not  necessarily
represent those of EURid.  While all care has been  taken  to  avoid  any  known
viruses, the recipient is advised to check this email  and  any  attachment  for
presence of viruses.

http://www.eurid.eu/en/legal-disclaimer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150106/c54fdefa/attachment.html>