[CCWG-ACCT] A modest proposal to start the week

[Pär Brumark]

Agree totally and +1 Jonathan!

Best Regards,

Pär Brumark

Jonathan Zuck skrev den 2015-06-01 03:08:
> Folks,
> I’m sure if we think about it for just a second, we can all agree that 
> anyone’s recollections (whatever their tenure or status in the 
> community) about the past intentions, motives and actions of the 
> board, the community or some interest group, are COMPLETELY 
> IRRELEVANT. The exercise in which we are engaged involves imaging the 
> worst of these things and attempting to put structures in place to 
> mitigate the consequences should the unfortunate occur. Let’s stop 
> returning to this TOTALLY USELESS discussion of track records and good 
> intentions and stay on task. If you believe the community can do no 
> wrong and the board represents a machiavellian force of darkness that 
> needs to be throttled, you’re in entitled to your opinion. Just take 
> it someplace else. If you believe the community is just a rag tag 
> collection of special interest groups with political motives and  that 
> the board should receive a medal, I hereby validate your opinion as 
> well. Now take it someplace else. This is decidedly NOT the 
> conversation we are trying to have here. Every time it comes up, it 
> sends us down a ridiculous path and ends badly.
>
> So here’s my proposal:
>
>  1. If you are drafting a post to the list and it begins to sound like
>     either an accusation or defense of the board, the community or
>     some SO or AC, PLEASE STOP TYPING. Back way from the PC, go for a
>     walk, come back and post something that is helpful to the discussion.
>  2. If you spot a post that slips through that reads like either an
>     accusation or defense of the board, the community or some SO or
>     AC, DON’T TAKE THE BAIT. Count to 10, call your therapist, do
>     whatever you must, but LET IT GO.
>
> That is all. Henceforth, I will flag all such posts as overt attempts 
> to derail this process of developing an effective accountability 
> framework for ICANN because there can be no other explanation for 
> their continued existence.  If you find yourself writing something 
> like “in all my years,” “it’s been my experience,” or “I don’t recall” 
> stop typing immediately and think about the useless debate you are 
> about to start or continue.
>
> This is NOT about the current board, the current community or anyone’s 
> intentions or motives. It’s about a post IANA contract world in which 
> ICANN needs effective accountability to the community. That’s it. It’s 
> not personal. Let’s get back to work. Thank you.
>
> Jonathan
>
> Jonathan Zuck
>
> /President/
>
> 202-331-2130 X 101 | jzuck at actonline.org 
> <mailto:jzuck at actonline.org> | Skype: jvzuck
>
> ACT | The App Association
>
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6442666/twitter.png 
> <https://twitter.com/actonline>
>
> 	
>
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6442666/fb.png 
> <https://www.facebook.com/actonline.org>
>
> 	
>
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6442666/actonline.png 
> <http://actonline.org/>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> 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/20150601/0d6223d3/attachment.html>