Completely agree with Greg - escalation and a greater description of escalation/resolution paths is something that should be worked on. On 24/09/2015 07:16, Greg Shatan wrote:
To pick up one of of Thomas's points: Clarifying and illustrating escalation paths (or perhaps we should more optimistically call them "resolution paths") would be very helpful. We (and others) spend a lot of time talking about "last resorts," in part because it's not supremely clear that they come only at the end of a road, which hopefully we get to the end of only rarely.
Greg
On Thursday, September 24, 2015, Thomas Rickert <rickert@anwaelte.de <mailto:rickert@anwaelte.de>> wrote:
All, I to not want to get into a legal argument, but want to offer an observation. There is a lot of talk about accountability of the community. This is important, no doubt about that.
But, let's not forget that decisions will not be made by the Community or the Single Member, but by the Board. The community powers are limited to asking the Board to redo decisions (with the exception of changes of Fundamental Bylaws that need approval). The new decision is still to be made by the Board. If Board members are of the opinion that the Community asks them to do illegal things or things that might expose them to liability or just things that are fundamentally wrong, I am sure the Board member would not be available for that.
That means that you need a rogue Community trying to force the Board to do wrong things and - for the wrong things to be resolved - a rogue Board, too.
I am adding this thought to the discussion as I get the impression that some think that the Single Member would replace the Board as a decision-making body.
Also, let us please remember that there will and must be consultation between the Board and the Community before decisions on the areas where the Community Powers are concerned, are taken. We should maybe think about making this element more visible as it lowers the risk of friction. Also, let me add that we should not focus on Community vs Board accountability / responsiblity. It is a joint responsibility and mutual accountability is what we need.
Thomas
--- rickert.net <http://rickert.net>
Am 22.09.2015 um 16:32 schrieb Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au');>>:
Hello Avri,
I think that the fiduciary responsibility does not change.
Yes - that is my understanding of the role of a Board director in any model.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
-- Matthew Shears Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology mshears@cdt.org + 44 771 247 2987 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus