[CWG-Stewardship] FW: [IOTF] Rationale for PTI Staffing Recommendations

[Mueller, Milton L]

From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com]
Just thinking aloud here, assuming staff of PTI are handled by secondment, what part of the CWG proposal will that go against?

MM: The CWG proposal calls for legal separation of names PTI and ICANN, Inc. and the creation of a whole new California corporation with its own board. If ICANN simply hires and seconds all of PTI staff then PTI is not a separate, independent subsidiary but merely a department of ICANN.

How will that hinder the community from exercising any of the community powers?

MM: the community powers relevant to separation of names IANA functions from ICANN’s PTI are already so weak as to be ineffectual, imho, but PTI staffing does not worsen this situation

What impact will it have in the operation of the functions?

MM: potentially, quite a bit. It is, as we have already discussed, a question of to whom the staff is loyal to or accountable to. How independent is PTI in its implementation, or how mixed up are they in the policy process? The closer they are to ICANN the greater the dangers here.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160617/a4ac87c9/attachment-0001.html>