Ed,

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Edward Morris <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi McTim,
>
>
>>
>> > An exceptional series. Should be required reading.
>> >
>> > The question it brings to mind is why, given the lack of transparency
>> > and
>> > accountability, anyone would want to be part of an ICANN supporting
>> > organization. It's a question I think increasingly we all need to ask
>> > ourselves individually.
>> >
>>
>> There is no lack of accountability or transparency in the ASO.  Don't
>> paint all SOs with a broad brush.
>
>
>
> I wasn't. The question is why one would want to be part of any supporting
> organization supporting ICANN, when the private California corporation
> itself may not be worthy of support due to its lack of transparency and
> unaccountability. As I wrote, it is a question each one of us needs to
> answer for ourselves as the policy processes within ICANN become more staff
> driven and less driven by the multi-stakeholder model.


There is zero possibility of Staff interference possible in the ASO processes.

It is truly bottom up, open, transparent, etc.

The rest of ICANN should take a good look at the ASO/RIR way of working.

No silos, no lack of clarity, no improvising/end running around PDPs
and best of all, no GAC interference.


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel