On Oct 5, 2015, at 8:49 AM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:Hi,
What about the idea of recasting the SM to work on a consensus model
instead of voting?
The info we got from Sidley/Adler indicates that this should be
possible. Then instead of working on votes we can work on
Recommendations and Advice objections to gauge consensus (e.g. no more
that 1 SO recommends against + 1 AC advises against)
Note: I personally accept that constant outreach, a place for anyone in
an ACSO and open comment period in the 6 UN languages meets the
condition for a viable global model of participation.
avri
On 05-Oct-15 10:31, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:Jordan,
We should not pusjh to a particular model SMM while we have
disagreement a) from the Board and b) from people among CCWG ,in
partzicular, if the voting arrangements are maintained and if most of
the ACs refrain to pop in/ or opt for voting and c) indication from
others that with such voting by the ACs the balance between the
private sectors and others, on the one hand, and governments on the
other hand is c ompromised,
We need to listen to each others and not to few that have already
agreed to SMM.
Pls kindly understand that there is diverghence of views .$
Let us find out a consensus along the line that was proposed by Stev
and amended by me
Tks
Kavouss
2015-10-05 16:25 GMT+02:00 Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com
<mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>>:
2015-10-05 15:38 GMT+02:00 Matthew Shears <mshears@cdt.org
<mailto:mshears@cdt.org>>:
+ 1 also
On 05/10/2015 13:54, James M. Bladel wrote:+1.
Any claims that we must abbreviate accountability reforms in
order to fit the IANA transition timeline has those two
priorities reversed.
Sent via iPhone. Blame Siri.
On Oct 2, 2015, at 19:44, Jordan Carter
<jordan@internetnz.net.nz <mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz>>
wrote:Thanks Avri for this nice statement of one of the key
dilemmas facing this group.
The divergence between:
- the transition can't happen until accountability is
sustainable, and so that requires the member model as a
foundation
and
- the transition can't happen if there is a significant
change such as that to a member model, and so that requires
ruling out the member model
is quite stark.
FWIW my instincts are in line with Avri's. If ICANN's
current level of accountability was acceptable, the
community would not have demanded an accountability process
alongside the transition process, and NTIA would not have
agreed the two had to be intertwined and interrelated.
cheers
Jordan
On 1 October 2015 at 10:38, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org
<mailto:avri@acm.org>> wrote:
Hi,
The Board's critique rests on a notion that the
introduction of
anything new in the ICANN system will be a destabilizing
factor and most
be avoided.
This ignores the fact that by removing the NTIA backstop
we destabilize
the current system. It might have been possible to find
a new balance
(not that the old worked that well given the amount of
discontent that
existed prior to the CCWG process) by tweaking the
system. The early
work of the CCWG, however, showed that this was not
enough. So we
decided to bring back a notion that existed in the early
ICANN design,
the idea of membership. Membership has always been part
of the kit that
was available to ICANN in the multistakeholder model.
An initial
experiment met with some issues and instead of fixing
that then, they
threw the notion away without exploring possible tweaks
to the system.
As a result we are living in ICANN 2.0, a system that
was imposed in a
top down manner and one that was never fully accepted by
those at the
bottom.
Now, albeit in a very different configuration, the CCWG
is proposing to
establish a community consensus based idea of
membership. I believe that
this should be given a fair analysis before rejecting
it. It is also
important to remember that the NTIA requirements were
not a prohibition
of new mechanisms or structures, but rather evidence
that these
structure did not increase the current risk, or fact, of
capture and
that they could be held to account.
The Board criticism is important to look at for
arguments that show the
areas in which the CCWG plan either does not explain its
protections
against capture and its accountability checks and
balances or may have
gaps in these areas. If we cannot explain what we
propose, or cannot
close the gaps, then it becomes time to consider
variations on the model
or another model altogether. In my opinion, we are not
there.
avri
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast
antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--
Jordan Carter
Chief Executive
*InternetNZ*
+64-4-495-2118 <tel:%2B64-4-495-2118> (office) |
+64-21-442-649 <tel:%2B64-21-442-649> (mob)
Email: jordan@internetnz.net.nz
<mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz>
Skype: jordancarter
Web: <http://www.internetnz.nz>www.internetnz.nz
<http://www.internetnz.nz>
/A better world through a better Internet /
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--
Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology
mshears@cdt.org <mailto:mshears@cdt.org> + 44 771 247 2987
<tel:%2B%2044%20771%20247%202987>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avast logo <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software.
www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community