[CCWG-ACCT] "Staff Accountability" has been assigned to Work Stream 2 since Frankfurt, and there was no decision to remove it by the CCWG
seun.ojedeji at gmail.com
Sun Feb 7 17:28:18 UTC 2016
While i am not opposed to such inclusion, community review of staff is a
path I hope will be threaded carefully especially if it exceeds key
That should always be the role of board and I don't think it's one of those
things that the community should tell the board "how to do" by hardcoding
it in the bylaw.
On 7 Feb 2016 6:00 p.m., "Robin Gross" <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
> Our 3rd draft report contains an error that needs to be corrected in the
> final version of the report.
> Specifically, paragraph 34 on page 8 of Annex 12, which provides the
> details for Rec. 12’s Work Stream 2 work states:
> “Public comments revealed that a review of staff accountability should
> not be pursued.”
> I do not recall any such CCWG conversation or decision to remove "staff
> accountability" from WS2, and I’ve been on every call since the public
> comment period referenced in the text.
> And given recent events and the growing concerns about the CEO’s conflict
> of interest with China, I can’t imagine this group *would* come to such a
> conclusion, if a conversation were too happen on the topic.
> So unless someone can point to a conversation in the record where the CCWG
> did in fact decide to remove staff accountability from WS2 based on public
> comments, the issue must go back in to our report where CCWG assigned it,
> since its removal appears to be 'accidental’ by the staff-drafters in the
> last moments of drafting.
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community