[CCWG-ACCT] got some lawyerly answers on membership structure

Wed Jan 28 06:50:03 UTC 2015

But each organization could define its own threshold for recall.

From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Dr Eberhard W Lisse
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 12:34 AM
To: CCWG Accountability
Cc: directors at omadhina.net
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] got some lawyerly answers on membership structure

Will not fly, because for example not all ccTLD Managers are members of the ccNSO, and nothing prevents a ccTLD Manager from leaving to become unbound by ccNSO developed ICANN Policy.

And the structures are so diverse internally that once someone is elected a recall is never going to happen.

el

Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini

On Jan 28, 2015, at 03:32, Drazek, Keith <kdrazek at verisign.com<mailto:kdrazek at verisign.com>> wrote:
Hi Rudolph,

In this context, ICANN's "shareholders" or "members" would be the elected or appointed Chairs of the existing ICANN community's bottom-up, consensus-based, multi-stakeholder structures. If those Chairs aren't ethical, then they could and should be replaced by their respective groups. I believe this would give us a built-in and permanent accountability loop rooted in the multi-stakeholder system, which is precisely what NTIA has asked for.

Regards,
Keith

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 27, 2015, at 6:50 PM, "Rudolph Daniel" <rudi.daniel at gmail.com<mailto:rudi.daniel at gmail.com>> wrote:

No nuance missing Jonathan. :)
Likening to shareholders reminded me that shareholders are not always ethical in their pursuit of accountability.
RD

On Jan 27, 2015 6:58 PM, "Jonathan Zuck" <JZuck at actonline.org<mailto:JZuck at actonline.org>> wrote:
>
> Hmmm. I guess “we” is the community that have reached a fairly solid consensus that new accountability mechanisms need to be put in place at ICANN. And the role “we” seek them to play is exactly what EBW outlined below as aspirational. The issue is structural reform that empowers the community to hold the board of ICANN accountable going forward. Likening it to “shareholder” accountability is not about turning ICANN into a commercial organization, merely addressing concerns surrounding liability. What nuance am I missing here?
>
>
>
> From: Rudolph Daniel [mailto:rudi.daniel at gmail.com<mailto:rudi.daniel at gmail.com>]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 5:55 PM
> To: Jonathan Zuck
> Cc: Accountability Cross Community; Eric Brunner-Williams
> Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] got some lawyerly answers on membership structure
>
>
>
> Not sure I get who 'we' is and  'seek them to play'  ?
> RD
>
> On Jan 27, 2015 6:44 PM, "Jonathan Zuck" <JZuck at actonline.org<mailto:JZuck at actonline.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Agree but the point of accountability mechanisms is to ensure the board continues to play the role we seek them to play.
>>
>>
>>
>> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Rudolph Daniel
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 5:38 PM
>> To: Eric Brunner-Williams
>> Cc: Accountability Cross Community
>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] got some lawyerly answers on membership structure
>>
>>
>>
>> I would think, and  certainly it has been suggested elsewhere that public accountably be less of the shareholder kind and more of the ethical variety.
>> RD
>>
>> On Jan 27, 2015 3:04 PM, "Eric Brunner-Williams" <ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net<mailto:ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> I would not like to see the Board's duty as stewards of the public trust -- exercising reasonable care, inquisitive,  ... the strictest standard of duty of care in American law -- reduced to the pursuit of quarterly profits maximization prevalent in for-profit Boards.
>>>>
>>>> ICANN’s Board of Directors would become accountable to the community, in much the same way that the Boards of publicly-traded companies are ultimately accountable to their shareholders.
>>>
>>>
>>> I suggest our standards are, by initial design, higher than the likeness proposed.
>>>
>>> Eric Brunner-Williams
>>> Eugene, Oregon
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
_______________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150128/41e97dad/attachment.html>