[CCWG-ACCT] Regarding members

[Kavouss Arasteh]

Dear Avri
Dear All
We intended to address the accountability at a level A(ICANN Board) for that  the membership model with UA was considered . Now we do not want UA as it may have  problem with some group??
Now we want membership without UA?
Does that serve the sane purpose?
Don, t we transfer the issue to another level? As we do not know to whom these natural persons without UA eould be responsible?
And how the intended accountability is implemented .
In Fact some level group ( natural persons ) who  should be accountable to their respective community( I do not know how?)are expected to discharge/ oversight accountability of ICANN ( level A). How?
Then who is accountable to whom?
Regards
Kavouss
      Sent from my iPhone

> On 24 May 2015, at 07:51, avri doria <avri at ella.com> wrote:
> 
> While I still have issuess with the shell UA  concept and believe the SOAC would need to become UA (which I understand is a problem for some stakeholders), I think this is a good explanation of issues with using natural persons as members.
> 
> 
> avri
> 
> Sent from a T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
> 
> 
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Edward Morris <egmorris1 at toast.net>
> Date:05/24/2015 1:19 AM (GMT-05:00) 
> To: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>
> Cc: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Regarding members
> 
> Although something we certainly should explore and consider I would proceed very cautiously in anointing natural persons as members. My concern has to do more with statutory rights that come with membership than anything we're proposing for internal governance. Although perhaps  initially easier to conceptualize organizationally, the use of some rights granted may be less easy to understand or implement under a natural person model. Do we want to rest in an individual the right and / or obligation for filing requests for documents or for litigation under the derivative lawsuit powers granted members? Do we want a situation where lawsuits would  be Greenberg v. ICANN rather than ALAC v. ICANN, for example? Do we really intend to force community members, SG's or Constituencies for example, to have to go through a natural person to obtain access to ICANN corporate records as provided for in the California Corporations Code? My initial impulse would be to suggest that the shell U
> A model would be a better vehicle in which to actually use the powers granted members although the natural person model might be a bit easier to understand at conception. I look forward to input from independent counsel and for further discussion on this matter.
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> > On May 23, 2015, at 11:41 AM, Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au> wrote:
> > 
> > Hello All,
> > 
> > I have been reading the various discussions on the topic of using members as a way of holding ICANN accountable.
> > 
> > Speaking personally - I think the concept of members can work.
> > 
> > My advice though would be to try to keep it simple.   The idea of creating separate  unincorporated versions of the GAC, ccNSO etc - just adds complexity that makes it more and more difficult for outsiders to really understand how ICANN works.   It already takes years to understand how the GNSO or ALAC processes work.
> > 
> > From my personal perspective - we should just allow the SOs and ACs to appoint their chairs/vice-chairs or nominated representatives as "members" of ICANN for a term that matches the term of their office.   This seems to require minimal change in ICANN's existing structure.
> > 
> > Each individual that is selected to become a member of ICANN could then sign an agreement with ICANN that ensures that ICANN provides some indemnity for the member, provided that the member operates in accordance with the direction of their SO and AC through a properly constituted motion according to the procedures of that group.   Ie the member would have a very narrow role to basically convey the decision of the respective SO and AC.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Bruce Tonkin
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> > 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
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150524/4e336dfd/attachment.html>