Varying legal requirements aside, the legitimacy of any corporate body surely derives from membership. The Board (or Council or however it is named) is the executive instantiation of the larger corporate membership. ICANN made a mis-step in 1998 in not having members at the outset and we are paying the price. And lest we forget, ICANN isn't quite a FIFA, and the purpose of the Accountbility WG is to ensure the entrenchment of constitutional safeguards that prevent it ever becoming one. On 16/10/15 07:30, william currie wrote:
If ICANN were incorporated in Delaware, it would be required to have members, and the whole debate of SMM vs MEM would be moot.
On Friday, October 16, 2015, Nigel Roberts <nigel@channelisles.net <mailto:nigel@channelisles.net>> wrote:
Well, if there IS a staring contest going on between the Board and the Community to see who will blink first, it seems the Community just woke up to realise that it includes a couple of members possessing the glare of a basilisk . . .
On 16/10/15 00:25, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:
Colleagues
Good morning in Dublin.
The attached letter from Senators Thune and Schatz to the Chair of the ICANN Board will be of interest to many of you.
I wish you good fortune in the meetings
Regards
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweigesq@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 <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article...>
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community