Hi Robin,
we felt it was covered in bylaw changes as the bylaws state the mission. Going through the transcripts, though, you will find that keeping ICANNs mandate and mission was mentioned.
Thomas,
I'm not sure including the question of scope under "bylaws changes" gives the issue the attention it deserves.
Both individuals and the community as a whole need to be able to object to something that ICANN does on the grounds that, however worthy, it's just not something that ICANN ought to be involved in. This certainly needs a mechanism, and we may indeed be able to use the same mechanism for this that would be used for other bylaws breaches. But it would very likely be advantageous to enunciate more clearly the scope if the bylaws that set it out are to be more than a general guidance for the company, and to be a standard for review that can support an objective adjudication of a complaint on this basis.
At the very least, I think this is something the group should turn its mind to. Restraining ultra fires activity has been repeatedly identified as a stress test, was listed among the top level points on the mind map from Frankfurt, and really needs our considered attention
Kind Regards,
Malcolm