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