-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
And when specific things were commented on they fixed them.
I am not against making points and getting things fixed. That is
happening and we can see it.
I am talking about the filing of yet another RR. Until such time as we
have a new accountability structure, that is just a feel good waste of
time for everyone.
But I know I will not stop you from filing an RR. I am just
completely against it and get more so all the time, as I see them
improving the process. And please do not accuse me of not trying to
get it right. I am working on that and made many of my points in a
blog i produced on the spot when the plan first came out - when i
complained about various aspects and where we have already seen fixes.
So lets just agree to disagree and stop this.
avri
On 29-Aug-14 12:15, Robin Gross wrote:
> Avri, I don't understand your claims that we aren't getting on
> with the accountability process. At every opportunity we have
> participated in this process and are continuing to participate in
> the process going forward. Expressing our concerns about a bad
> process is not stopping the process - it is the means by which it
> improve it going forward. Some of us care about getting it right
> more than just playing along with whatever we are given.
>
> Robin
>
>
>
> On Aug 29, 2014, at 2:01 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
>
>> Signed PGP part Hi,
>>
>> How is a letter from a few leaders on the own initiative without
>> any 'democratic' checking with their constituencies, asking for
>> more time an indication that the whole community indicated
>> no-support.
>>
>> I for one am satisficed they are moving ahead, we have been
>> waiting to do this accountability work for years. Enough talking
>> about it in the future and time get started with the work.
>>
>> Yes, they could have introduced it better. Yes it needs fixing -
>> and they are fixing, hence the call for names, and the fact that
>> charters will be worked out with the WGs. Yes, it would have
>> been wise for them to hold yet another comment period given the
>> extensive model they were offering.
>>
>> But this desire to argue forever for a perfect mechanism instead
>> of getting about the work of fixing ICANN accountability
>> continue to baffle me.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 29-Aug-14 08:22, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
>>> Am i missing something? Looks like ICANN is continuing in it's
>>> Accountability process irrespective of the communities joint
>>> letter indicating a no-support.
>>>
>>> Cheers! sent from Google nexus 4 kindly excuse brevity and
>>> typos. On 29 Aug 2014 05:04, "Adam" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Accountability & Governance Public Experts Group has
>>>> published its call for candidates for advisors to the ICANN
>>>> Accountability & Governance Coordination Group. Please see <
>>>> https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-08-28-en>
>>>>
>>>> text below.
>>>>
>>>> Adam
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In Short
>>>>
>>>> The Accountability & Governance Public Experts Group is
>>>> asked to select up to seven advisors to the ICANN
>>>> Accountability & Governance Coordination Group. As part of
>>>> executing its mandate, the Public Experts Group is issuing a
>>>> Call for Candidates to encourage nominations from the
>>>> community.
>>>>
>>>> Nominations are to be submitted to [log in to unmask] by
>>>> Wednesday, 10 September 2014 – 23:59 UTC.
>>>>
>>>> Background Information On 14 March 2014 the National
>>>> Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
>>>> announced its intent to transition its stewardship of the
>>>> Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions to the
>>>> global multistakeholder community. NTIA asked the Internet
>>>> Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), as the
>>>> IANA functions contractor and global coordinator for the
>>>> Domain Name System (DNS), to convene a multistakeholder
>>>> process to develop a proposal for the transition. This
>>>> process is currently under way as further described here.
>>>>
>>>> During discussions around the transition process, the
>>>> community raised the broader topic of the impact of the
>>>> change in the historical contractual relationship with the
>>>> United States in light of the transition ofNTIA's stewardship
>>>> role. The community identified the importance of improving
>>>> ICANN Accountability & Governance as a crucial aspect and,
>>>> after community consultations at the ICANN 49 and ICANN50
>>>> meetings and a comment period on a draft process from 6 May –
>>>> 27 June 2014, ICANN published afinal Process and Next Steps
>>>> on 14 August 2014.
>>>>
>>>> Subsequent to this announcement, on 19 August 2014, ICANN
>>>> announced the formation of the Public Experts Group. These
>>>> four individuals – who are not part of ICANN's staff or Board
>>>> – are asked to select up to seven advisors to the
>>>> Coordination Group. The Public Experts are Mr. Brian Cute,
>>>> Ms. Jeanette Hofmann, Amb. Janis Karklins, and Hon. Lawrence
>>>> E. Strickling.
>>>>
>>>> Role of Advisors The role of the Advisors is defined as
>>>> follows in the Process:
>>>>
>>>> The advisors, selected by the Public Experts Group, will
>>>> bring an external, independent voice to this process to
>>>> assure that best practices are brought in from outside of the
>>>> ICANN community. While there is a level of research and work
>>>> that the advisors will do on their own, the integration of
>>>> the advisors with the rest of the Coordination Group is key
>>>> to considering how the research they perform can be best
>>>> implemented to solve for the issues identified. The advisors
>>>> can also help bring inputs in from their own networks as
>>>> necessary. Utilized correctly, the advisor inputs will not
>>>> only assist in developing enhanced accountability practices
>>>> for ICANN, but provide a model that other multistakeholder
>>>> organizations will strive to meet.
>>>>
>>>> The areas identified for expertise include:
>>>>
>>>> • Internet Technical Operations • International
>>>> Organizational Reviews • Global Accountability Tools and
>>>> Metrics • Jurisprudence / Accountability Mechanisms •
>>>> Internet Consumer Protection (including privacy, human rights
>>>> and property rights concerns) • Economics (Marketplace and
>>>> Competition) • Global Ethics Frameworks • Operational,
>>>> Finance and Process • Board Governance • Transparency • Risk
>>>> Management • Governmental Engagement and Relations •
>>>> Multistakeholder Governance
>>>>
>>>> Selection of Advisors As part of executing its mandate, the
>>>> Public Experts Group is issuing a Call for Candidates to
>>>> encourage nominations and self-nomination of suitable
>>>> candidates. The Public Experts Group may reach out to their
>>>> networks for additional suggestions.
>>>>
>>>> The Public Experts Group will conduct its activities with a
>>>> "default open" and its process can be followed, through its
>>>> mailing list and its Wiki. In evaluating candidates, the
>>>> Public Expert Group will respect individual candidates'
>>>> privacy and will deliberate in closed session where
>>>> appropriate.
>>>>
>>>> How to Submit a Nomination The Public Experts Group is
>>>> seeking nominations for individuals to serve as Advisors to
>>>> the Coordination Group. Nominations should include the
>>>> following:
>>>>
>>>> • A brief description of the candidate's background •
>>>> Identified area(s) of expertise based on the list in the
>>>> Process.
>>>>
>>>> Nominations should be emailed to [log in to unmask]
>>>> Upon receipt of a nomination, ICANN staff will confirm with
>>>> the candidate if he/she is indeed willing to be considered.
>>>>
>>>> Deadline Nominations will be accepted until Wednesday, 10
>>>> September – 23:59 UTC. The Public Experts Group will select
>>>> Advisors to the Coordination Group in time for the first
>>>> Coordination Group meeting, which will take place from
>>>> during the ICANN 51 meeting in Los Angeles from 12-16 October
>>>> 2014.
>>>>
>>>> Timeline Advisors are anticipated to serve on the
>>>> Coordination Group from October 2014 until April 2015. During
>>>> this time, Advisors can estimate 5-10h of work per week, with
>>>> a heightened workload during the ICANN51 (12 – 16 October
>>>> 2014) and ICANN 52 (8 – 12 February 2015) meetings where
>>>> travel for in person meetings is expected.
>>>>
>>>> NB: The timeline described above is the Public Experts
>>>> Group's assessment based on the Process and is subject to
>>>> change after the Coordination Group determines its working
>>>> methods.
>>>>
>>>> Compensation Advisors will not receive remuneration for their
>>>> time. However, travel, meal and lodging costs to
>>>> participate in Coordination Group meetings will be reimbursed
>>>> upon request in accordance withICANN's community travel
>>>> support guidelines.
>>>>
>>>> Contact Please contact [log in to unmask] for any
>>>> questions you may have.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUAEfYAAoJEOo+L8tCe36HhRgH/RWqfMv/DhizxXlCHYyQ/2X7
/j07VWs6Sn0j6hLpPCdobWhWWaESz1z+EwdDTLFZ7tTPoGv48LWV1h1kqE7eqF8w
KlOD0+/lLgrlcdkQ/JSQhM0TmK4E4W9X5uy/g4tUY6vx6NdcwcHnVQvvIlnI/y7C
4CTZNF0pC2ro2vXEFpBbMeDTflEV9LziOdEqqYhmDijIepJu22cqFXI/9XiRvriH
ZQkPr1kp96ZDvItD3t4+U6GElu6aDiOqzo1Wy1UHslTIqfB0LkVS8V4YR5HLOIdX
VYuBijp4fy4TeB+H91A3EcxnJcAt6sh2uIOcrntRbsEd5nR3PyMFEzzqGD2Dpsg=
=jV75
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
