Hi,


> 
> I very much disagree.  It is her job to relay to the list any and all
> posted information that might be of interest to the SG.  

I wasn't aware of that. I felt staff support was intended to relieve volunteers of administrative chores. I wasn't aware it entailed non-administrative content and editorial submissions.


> It is not her
> job to decide whether something is or is not propaganda - to some extent
> it is all propoganda-ish.

Disagree. For example, notification of meeting times and methods is not propaganda. It is administrative in nature. Nowhere is it claimed that it was anyone's job to determine whether something was propaganda. However, once staff starts to submit non-administrative content to the list he or she assumes some editorial control over substantive content. IMHO it is not appropriate for staff members to do this on the members list, a list BTW we have purposely kept on non-ICANN servers, in part, in order to maintain our independence. 

Ed

> 
> 
> 
>> On 19-May-15 08:00, Edward Morris wrote:
>> Hi everybody,
>> 
>> I'm posting this to the PC list as the policy arm of the NCSG.
>> 
>> The following email from Maryam made me a bit uneasy. It's not just
>> the possibility of recurring nightmares from viewing once again the
>> 'Fadi hands' video. :) Rather I don't feel it is appropriate for an
>> ICANN staff member to use his or her posting privileges on the members
>> list to disseminate what I would consider ICANN propaganda.
>> 
>> It's perfectly fine for a member to post such a link and often we do.
>> I just think having staff do the same opens a path I'd prefer not to
>> go down. Nonmembers, obviously, do not have the right to post on the
>> members list and I'd suggest that staff posting rights be limited to
>> administrative matters unless directed otherwise by the Chair / EC or
>> in response to a members question or request. It's protection not only
>> for the independence of the NCSG that concerns me, it's for protection
>> of the staff as well. I don't want the staff member(s) involved to be
>> open to pressure from ICANN corporate to get certain approved
>> perspectives out to our members. That's not their role, not how their
>> job performance should be measured, and not why they have been allowed
>> posting privileges on the members list. IMHO It's just not good practice.
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Ed 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On May 18, 2015, at 4:00 PM, Maryam Bakoshi <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Dear All,
>>> 
>>> Please find below link of video message from ICANN President, Fadi
>>> Chehade, following posting of the draft proposals for public comment
>>> by the Cross Community Working Groups to Develop an IANA Stewardship
>>> Transition Proposal on Naming Related Functions (CWG-Stewardship) &
>>> on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (CCWG-Accountability).
>>> 
>>> Video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMusmAcQpu0&feature=youtu.be
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Many thanks,
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>> Maryam Bakoshi
>>> 
>>> Secretariat ­Support - NCSG, NCUC, NPOC
>>> 
>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Email:  [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>> 
>>> Mobile:  +44 7737 698036
>>> 
>>> Skype:  maryam.bakoshi.icann
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> http://www.avast.com