I think this is a very good question.  IN theory, ICANN is us.  It seems 
to me (my opinion only, based on observation of behaviour and concerns 
particularly expressed on lists during the IANA transition discussions) 
that there appears to be us, and a bureaucracy/power structure centred 
in the Board, but which also includes staff, at least senior staff.  
Possibly inevitable once the supporting structure reaches a certain 
size, but something to contemplate, as it affects ownership of the 
community in decisions reached.

Stephanie Perrin
On 2016-06-07 23:49, Shane Kerr wrote:
> Fellow NCSG members,
>
> One thing that I had previously missed caught my eye just now:
>
> At 2016-06-07 14:07:25 +0200
> Niels ten Oever <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> On 06/03/2016 08:13 PM, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
> ...
>>> it isn't. It is possibly one of community culture, but if we accept
>>> that, we can't just push this back to ICANN to somehow deal with. I
>>> don't want a return to the Victorian moral panic of the 1880s, I don't
>>> want ICANN inhibiting anyone's free speech to satisfy a few special
>>> interests.
> ...
>>> Helsinki. If anything, I feel like WE are more at fault here than ICANN
>>> as an organisation is. WE are not respecting the processes already in
> ...
>>> ICANN has been very responsive to the concerns raised by the community,
> All of these statements share a similar tone: ICANN is something that
> we interact with, but we are not a part of ICANN.
>
> Perhaps I am confused, because I come from the IETF and RIR
> communities, which allow anyone to join and participate. While there is
> a distinction between the ARIN community and the ARIN not-for-profit
> company (for example) or the IETF and the IAB (as another example), for
> the most part direction comes from the wider, open community.
>
> You know, in a kind of bottom-up, open, inclusive way.
>
> So... if this is not how ICANN works, then I feel like the ICANN
> experiment has gone off the rails and is in serious danger of failing
> completely. If "ICANN" is something different from, well, us, then what
> is it?
>
> Are we not ICANN?
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Shane