Dear all

This might not be the right time.. but the question that I have always
had about the ICANN board is a structural one to do with what I feel is
an inherent tension in the dual nature of its role.

If my questions have already been answered by the board or previous
board, please just point me to the right place.

I would like to hear how the board feels about and manages what to me
looks like two different, and potentially conflicting (in terms of
interest) thrusts of accountability.


The ICANN board has a dual oversight role - it is the governing body
accountable for ensuring that ICANN policy decisions are sound, and
consistent with ICANN policies and procedures. In this respect the ICANN
board is responsible for making sure that ICANN plays its role as a
public interest regulator of the DNS well. Their accountability is
therefore to the huge community out there that use, maintain, sell,
manage etc. domain names.

It is also the governing body responsible for the ICANN not-for-profit
corporation, making sure it has the financial resources needed to
function, that it has a strong brand and a good reputation, that it
complies with statutory obligations. Their accountability is therefore
to ICANN the institution.

So questions:

Do they agree that there can be tension between these two thrusts of
accountability? And even conflict?

If no, why not?

If yes, how do they manage it?

And, don't they think that it would strengthen ICANN and the board to
address this? They could for example, make use of board committees to
delegate some of these functions? Or is that already happening?

Anriette

On 29/02/2016 08:21, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
> I agree, but if we want to simply put it on the record that we are not
> amused, this is the time.
> SP
> 
> On 2016-02-29 0:59, James Gannon wrote:
>> I agree we got a bad deal on that but its dead in the water for
>> getting more people onto it, the rejection of the BC request was
>> pretty absolute so they won’t backtrack on that or us either.
>>
>> -jg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 29/02/2016, 3:38 a.m., "NCSG-Discuss on behalf of Stephanie Perrin"
>> <[log in to unmask] on behalf of
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> We are concerned about the limited number of folks on the Consumer
>>> protection, competition and trust review that is going on at the
>>> moment.  Carlos is our only person on that, Malcolm was rejected. You
>>> may recall the BC requested adding one of their members, in the name of
>>> gender balance.
>>> Stephanie
>>>
>>> On 2016-02-28 22:29, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>>>> Tapani
>>>> As a veteran of many of these sessions, I want us to avoid wasting
>>>> time and just generating animosity.
>>>> I would strongly encourage us to ask questions that:
>>>>     a)  are forward-looking, and give us an opportunity to shape
>>>> agendas and perceptions on things that are not already finished
>>>>     b)  involve requests for things that the board or staff could
>>>> actually deliver for us
>>>>
>>>> Any ideas about that?
>>>>
>>>> E.g., is there are request we can make regarding the RDS (Whois)
>>>> process that would position us better?
>>>> Are there any requests regarding the implementation process for the
>>>> CCWG recommendations that will help us make sure things don't go off
>>>> track? Are there any committees that we can ask to be on?
>>>> Can we ask them about the impending GNSO review and whether they
>>>> agreed with our assessment of the biased Westlake report? Things of
>>>> that sort
>>>>   
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>>>>> Tapani Tarvainen
>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 6:10 AM
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: Questions to the Board?
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> One regular event at ICANN meetings is that we get to meet the
>>>>> Board, talk
>>>>> with them about and ask them whatever we want.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Board would, however, like to know in advance what we're going
>>>>> to ask
>>>>> them, so they could better prepare for it.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you have suggestions for topics for our meeting with the Board in
>>>>> Marrakech, please let me know as soon as possible (feel free to
>>>>> post to the list
>>>>> or me directly, as you prefer).
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Tapani Tarvainen
> 
> 

-- 
-----------------------------------------
Anriette Esterhuysen
Executive Director
Association for Progressive Communications
[log in to unmask]
www.apc.org
IM: ae_apc