On 8 Feb 2012, at 22:41, Milton L Mueller wrote:

> [Milton L Mueller] so I'm confused. Above, you make what seems to be a very good point about the documentation of the policy in the guidebook and our ability to object to unsupported uses of the OI's powers. Then, you tell us that there is no written documentation. Perhaps you can clarify. 

The guidebook is clear as far a I am concerned.  But of course all written material is open to interpretation.

But i have been given to understand that there may be more detailed guidance given to dispute resolution groups that includes all sort so background information - hopefully including the original recommendations.
i know for sure, for example, that more guidelines are being given to the SARP, the group that determine whether the Applicants for assistance are qualified for the program.
I think we should be insisting on seeing that information before it is used by any of the panels and should have the ability to comment on it.

> 
> If there is clear written guidance then it is not as bad as it could be, although ICANN does NOT have an "independent judiciary" that one can take a dispute to if in fact the IO misbehaves. And if the IO misbehaves in a way that would ingratiate powerful interests, ICANN staff, or his/her own whims, all you are telling us is that we have the opportunity to scream our heads off. And we have ample precedents for the effectiveness of that strategy.

We can do more than scream our heads off.  As i said, not only do the objection dispute resolution groups have the ability to dismiss it as an inappropriate claim, those who made the application have the ability to respond and other can work to help them with that.

As for the effectiveness of screaming ones head off.  I think history has shown that it can be effective at times.  JAS, for example, is the result of well reasoned and persistent 'screaming our heads off'.  but of course, you might be right, should we need to scream our heads off, we might not succeed.  I will grant that possiblity but refuse to accept its certainty. 

And in the final analysis, there is reconsideration,  independent review panel on all board decisions though non binding on any negative decision, and ultimately the courts.  ICANN is currently living under a microscope - any abuse of the IO can be limited, in my opinion.

Of course when it gets down to which objections are valid and which aren't, we may have disagreements among ourselves as to what is valid and what is inappropriate.



avri