In addition, we should be wary of the fact that too much analysis always leads to paralysis. Regards<div id="DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><table style="border-top: 1px solid #aaabb6; margin-top: 10px;"> <tr> <td style="width: 105px; padding-top: 15px;"> <a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig..." target="_blank"><img src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/logo-avast-v1.png" style="width: 90px; height:33px;"/></a> </td> <td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 20px; color: #41424e; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 18px;">This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. <br /><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig..." target="_blank" style="color: #4453ea;">www.avast.com</a> </td> </tr> </table><a href="#DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1" height="1"></a></div> On 12/28/15, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:
On Dec 28, 2015 4:00 PM, "Roelof Meijer" <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> wrote:
I am getting rather worried about what some (unwanted) the implications of empowering the community through the CCWG proposals might actually be, if I (try to) follow the reasoning of Phil and Paul. There seems to be so much time in the community to ³chase every rabbit² on the basis of all kinds of assumptions
SO: You can say that again, post transition there is going to be a lot of bosses within the community. The unfortunate thing is just that they will be acting on behalf of the entire community. I hope that we will have so much time to identify those acts within the community as much as we have committed to identifying every mistake/error (including those far fetched) of the board/staff.
Like Avri, I fail to understand the crisis over this. And I agree with Tijani when he says: "Fadi Chehadé would never accept anything that leads to an intergovernmental Internet Governance; at the contrary, I think it is a way to reinforce the MSM in the advisory committee, and in the World Internet Conference². When making assumptions, let¹s at least take one¹s track record into consideration.
SO: In this process, the goal for some is not about building a better ICANN, but about building a breakable ICANN. Even though I don't agree with a number of board's comment on the CCWG latest draft, I can say I have come to understand why they commented the way they did.
Regards
Cheers,
Roelof
On 25-12-15 16:33, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Paul Rosenzweig" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:
We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come from, any public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi is) who did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal. While acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity -- none at all. At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so stringent that it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable test) so clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role with
the
private role was virtually non-existent.
For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this story:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the-reve
na
nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c5-11
e5 -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html. A minor Federal official wrote "The Revenant" before he joined the government. Now, the book is a major movie just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. In the normal course of events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be doing publicity for the film. Here, the author cannot -- because he is a Deputy Trade Representative of the US. Now, I don't know about you, but for me the likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the USTR office and draw an inference of official US government approval is vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a place where the officials private life could diverge from his public responsibility. But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for his movie.
As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is clearly much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his new "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN -- which is of course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted. Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably tone deaf.
I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your public position works both ways. We worry not only about the new "private" connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that the official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to benefit his future private actions rather than the public interest. It isn't the connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) -- it is the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made while the public official was still working for the public that raises the questions.
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: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China
Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.
avri
This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected better from Mr Chehade' in that department
Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent previous CEOs. Certainly not from Paul. In fact not even from Rod, who despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways was, in many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures!
In China, relationships matter.
Appearance matters. A lot.
Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than the 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the discussion with the relevant actors inside China.
The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' for peccadilloes).
So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't see the problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here.
I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet once again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'. A CEO can never be in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.)
The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his resignation, choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in another revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently completely different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive statements of them and their backers.
Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'.
UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations that operate in the same sphere. Why, in the name of accountabaility, does ICANN still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible optics of Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous.
Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count.
Hardly at all.
It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more than 'what', or even 'why'.
' And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!
Likewise.
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/