I attach for you a chronology of the accountability debate, starting with ICANN's decision to push towards the NetMundial event in September 2013.

My motivation was a personal one - I found myself losing track of the order of events, and I had a discomforting feeling that some of the reasons for us being under significant time pressure now were not of our making.

The chronology stands for itself and is fully referenced. It's my hope to have a blog post out about it today if possible. Whatever you think of my observations below, if you find errors in the document, I'd love to hear about them.

For our CCWG given where we are, I'd offer a couple of observations inspired by recalling the history:

* the opposition of ICANN to a community driven accountability process (from March to October 2014 - CCWG was only chartered in Nov 2014) is the cause of our current time pressure.

* the multistakeholder process the CCWG has been following is the only one that can drive to consensus. Development of separate alternative proposals by different players won't work.

* critical to success is the ability to synthesise feedback and evolve new models. This CCWG has done that significantly twice - in establishing its First Draft and Second Draft proposals, where it moved from individual memberships to a membership vehicle - while ensuring the proposal is able to deliver on the accountability requirements the community has established. 

* Efforts to do this a third time are placed at risk by the Board's actions in the past few weeks with its red lines tactic.

* it's not possible to synthesise and create new models to resolve differences except in an environment of trust and confidence that the outcome of such a dialogue will be respected. Only one party is obstructing that process - we all know what it is. That party needs to change its behaviour, and publicly commit to doing so as well. Otherwise, the entirety of the CCWG's work is at risk. 

Food for thought.

cheers

Jordan

--