[CWG-Stewardship] Fwd: [CCWG-Accountability] Regarding Board treatment of the output of the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability

[Seun Ojedeji]

sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 15 Dec 2014 20:57, "Jordan Carter" <jordan at internetnz.net.nz> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> On 16 December 2014 at 08:34, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 1:07 AM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>
>>> All:
>>>
>>> I thought that Bruce Tonkin's email a short while ago on the
CWG-Accountability list would also be of interest to people on this list.
>>>
>>> Separately, I expect that the NTIA could make the ICANN Board's
approval and implementation of improved accountability mechanisms proposed
by this group as a pre-condition to any transition.
>>
>>
>> If some real accountability can be implemented again i wonder why there
will still be need for the current overreaching cwg proposal. I can only
hope that we will fix this once and for all by introducing mechanisms
within the organisation that keeps both the community and board accountable
instead of creating new layer of politics which i will call open
i-stakeholder in disguise.
>>
>
> Seun, can I take it from this that you basically do not accept there is
any reason to maintain the status quo of an external contracting party for
the IANA Functions?

Going forward the entity of the status quo is changing and it's changing to
an unpredictable/complicated setup. We have not had any reason to worry
about the entity of current status quo because they are predictable. Also
the current entity was wise enough to have always awarded to ICANN, why
then is need to introduce an overreaching structure just to enable ability
to move (something that may never be exercised).

That is, in essence, you think ownership of these should pass through to
ICANN? (The CWG proposal is that they remain owned by the multistakeholder
community, of which ICANN is only a part.)
>
As a member of the community, I will like to see a process existing within
ICANN that ensures that the operation of IANA is done solely by community
developed policy.

On a lighter note, I think we should stop creating different definitions of
multistakeholder community, i am only concerned about a community that is
open, with a process that is inclusive and I think that can be achieved
within ICANN.

Thanks.

Cheers!

> thanks,
> Jordan
>
> --
> Jordan Carter
>
> Chief Executive
> InternetNZ
>
> 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob)
> jordan at internetnz.net.nz
> Skype: jordancarter
>
> To promote the Internet's benefits and uses, and protect its potential.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20141216/601bf809/attachment.html>