[CCWG-Accountability] WS1 vs WS2 recap and proposals

[Malcolm Hutty]

On 06/01/2015 15:17, Roelof Meijer wrote:
>>mechanisms in WS1 adequate *to* force implementation of WS2 items *in
> the event of* resistance from ICANN management and Board
> 
> How can we reasonably expect the (ICANN) board to commit to such a
> proposal (to force implementation of items that they do not agree to)?
> It would do so blindly, not knowing beforehand what those items would
> be. No sensible board would ever agree to this. 

I work for an organisation, LINX, that is structured as a membership
association. We have a Board, like any company. Our members, however,
are ultimately in charge, and indeed in our organisation they are asked
to approve any major strategic projects, as well as to ratify the
Board's proposed annual budget for the company.

Our Board has no problem with the concept that ultimately the members
are in charge. They don't expect to be overruled by the members, because
they expect to have consulted (and for the staff, like me, to have done
so) sufficiently that there is usually a consensus by the time we reach
a formal decision point. On rare occasions when this doesn't work out
like that, well, we work for the members; they're the boss.

Now I recognise that ICANN is not a membership organisation in the way
LINX is, and we've only a little over 500 members, rather than the
thousands of active participants in the ICANN community. So the analogy
isn't perfect. But the essential ethos that the Board is there to serve
the community, not rule it, ought to apply just the same. If the
organisation truly lives that ethos, conflict with the community will be
very rare.

In the event that the community insisted on something that a Board
member simply couldn't in good conscience accept, the appropriate and
honourable course is to resign your position on the Board, not to assert
your preeminence.

Back in about 2000, this happened at LINX: the Board had convinced
itself that the very survival of the organisation depended on
de-mutualising and selling out to Venture Capital. The members
disagreed, and the Board (and CEO) resigned en masse. We're still here,
still one of the world's most successful IXPs.

If it came to it, I'd rather see the ICANN Board quit than the community
quit ICANN.


Kind Regards,

Malcolm.

-- 
            Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523
   Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog
 London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/

                 London Internet Exchange Ltd
           21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY

         Company Registered in England No. 3137929
       Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA