Hi,

Perhaps something like:

A lot is being done to improve ICANN accountability, lets count on that.
The accountablity of the PTI is speculative - it is the pig in the poke*
- no idea how that will work.   We see lots of contract all around, what
have they ever made accountable?

The solution is more complex than the status quo, who knows what other
issues may crop up, what might go wrong.  Everyone says we are rushing
this, well maybe we are doing something dumb.

IANA works well now, everyone says so, as part of ICANN and we should
not take a chance of screwing that up

Or something like that.

avri

* archaic idiom: An offering or deal that is foolishly accepted without
being examined first.  Really a remarkable idiom.  After typing it, i
decided to check it on line for cultural explanation if necessary. 
Seems almost every culture has a version.


On 11-May-15 19:23, Nicolas Adam wrote:
> Having not participated in the process, I'm having a hard time
> grasping what the arguments in favor of no-separability could possibly
> be? Especially within ALAC ...
>
> What kind of accountability do these folks envision? People want an
> international institution? Or changing drastically the Board's
> structure of accountability?
>
> I guess it must be a case of "i'm in ICANN and I like ICANN and ICANN
> is me and i'm accountability enough" kind of thing ...?
>
> Please excuse my mobile brevity
>
>
> -------- Message d'origine --------
> De : Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]>
> Date : 2015/05/11 12:31 PM (GMT-05:00)
> À : [log in to unmask]
> Objet : Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Ominous update on the IANA transition
>
> Hi,
>
> While there are individual views  in the At-Large group discussing this,
> a group i participate in, I do not believe there is an ALAC view on the
> proposal yet.  From what I see, while some are still strongly committed
> to the fully locked-in eternal internal undifferentiated IANA solution,
> I think many are also looking on the current proposal as something they
> maybe possibly could live with.
>
> In a way, I expect that we will have some who can't live with this
> solution from each of the two extremes.  For some it won't be internal
> enough, for others it won't be independent enough.  The questions will
> be, does it solve the biggest concerns of each camp and can enough live
> with it?
>
> avri
>
> On 11-May-15 10:31, William Drake wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> >> On May 11, 2015, at 6:24 AM, Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]
> >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> >>
> >> The same can be said for names and is being said for names. Seun, let
> >> me make something clear to you and all other ALAC people who have
> >> tried to stop separability (interesting to know why but that is
> >> another issue).
> >
> > I think a nice capsule summary of the differences between  ALAC (which
> > is not to say At Large) and NCSG on these issues would be most helpful
> > if someone could provide.
> >
> > Bill
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> http://www.avast.com


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com