Dear Bruce I completely appreciate what you are trying to say here. And I completely disagree. The Board is running a corporation, to be sure -- but one that has at its core a responsibility for the management of a resource that is at the heart of economic growth, political freedom, etc. today. I respect the Board and want them to be engaged. But no group of individuals, however wise or thoughtful they may be, should have an independent power to define how this resource should be used. In the end, Milton is right (did I just say that???) the "community" is a much better proxy for the "public as a whole" than is the Board ... and the Board has to understand that. In fact, if I were to characterize this entire accountability process it would be that we are institutionalizing that insight .... Regards Paul Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au] Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 6:26 PM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Update on Board discussions on the CCWG Update Hello Milton,
you are subject to removal by designators through a process that involves x, y and z.... keep your community happy, or you might be on the receiving end of a recall.
That reminds me of two things. The old school of keep your boss happy, and other than that you can do what you want. That leads to situations like the recent emissions scandal at a car company. Keep the immediate community that elects you happy - with bread and circuses (an old roman approach). That leads to situations like some sporting organizations where as long as you keep the relevant officials that appoint/elect you happy with copious entertainment - you can do what you want. At the board level we have been working on training and other initiatives to raise the standard for Board directors to act on behalf of the public as a whole (not just those that can attend an ICANN meeting and are directly involved in voting for or appointing directors) and also train Board directors in best practice of corporate governance. So while I accept your proposal that we must "keep the community happy", I believe that is necessary but not sufficient. We must also continue to raise the standard of Board directors. I believe that was part of the recommendations from ATRT1 and ATRT2. Regards, Bruce Tonkin _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community