Thanks Jeff for sharing this. I think the practical work going on in the Working Parties is dealing with many broader items than just the ICANN Board.

Your example posits an interesting question: is "accountability" focused on the governance level, or on operations?

That is, is a staff level execution failure something the community or customers has accountability tools to deal with, beyond ensuring the Board holds CE to account?

One way of looking at this example is that it's up to the Board to hold its Chief Executive responsible for delivering secure services and that that's where it lies. If the Board fails to do so, some of the mechanisms under debate would help deal with that. Review and redress options would also provide some relief to those damaged.

Thoughts?

Jordan

On 3 March 2015 at 07:01, Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> wrote:

Removing Board Directors, while taking up most of the discussion for the last few weeks does not address most of the accountability issues we have with ICANN.

Not sure if you saw this article: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/03/02/icann_suffers_another_security_breach/

Which accountability measures do we have to safeguard us from this?

Thanks.

Jeffrey J. Neuman

Senior Vice President |Valideus USA | Com Laude USA

1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600

Mclean, VA 22102, United States

E: jeff.neuman@valideus.com or jeff.neuman@comlaude.com

T: +1.703.635.7514

M: +1.202.549.5079

@Jintlaw

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

Jordan Carter

Chief Executive
InternetNZ

04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob)
jordan@internetnz.net.nz
Skype: jordancarter

A better world through a better Internet