AOC type Reviews and Fundamental bylaws.
Hi, The issue came up of AOC type review bylaws being or not being fundamental bylaws in the context of the CWG IANA Review Function. The possibility of tagging individual bylaws as fundamental or not was mentioned. If such a capability exists, I would recommend that the bylaw defining the Accountability and Transparency Review be tagged as a fundamental bylaw. avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
On 30/04/2015 13:27, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
The issue came up of AOC type review bylaws being or not being fundamental bylaws in the context of the CWG IANA Review Function.
The possibility of tagging individual bylaws as fundamental or not was mentioned.
If such a capability exists, I would recommend that the bylaw defining the Accountability and Transparency Review be tagged as a fundamental bylaw.
The commitment to have AoC reviews is embodied in the Core Values, which I believe we do intend to tag as fundamental. I'm not sure that it is a good idea to tag as fundamental the more detailed bylaws on how the AoCs are to work and what they are to consider. We may well wish to amend or supplement these later, in the light of experience (maybe even soon, in the light of our deliberations on WS2). Tagging too much as fundamental, and then needing to change it rapidly and frequently, would devalue the protection for those things for which there is no foreseeable reason to change them, and every reason to wish them to be deeply entrenched. -- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/ London Internet Exchange Ltd 21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
Hi, On 30-Apr-15 09:32, Malcolm Hutty wrote:
Tagging too much as fundamental, and then needing to change it rapidly and frequently, would devalue the protection for those things for which there is no foreseeable reason to change them, and every reason to wish them to be deeply entrenched.
While the other reviews may be somewhat ephemeral and variable, the ATRT review should be very solid and tough to change, hence my recommendation that it, and no longer all the other imported AOC be fundamental. Originally I was proposing all AOC reviews should be. I could tell that did not have enough support and am suggesting that at least the ATRT get that status as it is fundamental to ongoing and sustainable accountability and transparency. thanks avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
This approach would also help to demonstrate to the larger community that ICANN does believe accountability and transparency to be among its most fundamental obligations in the course of its stewardship. It seems that this is a necessary commitment to have in place for all of ICANN's other undertakings to have legitimacy and to give us confidence and the tools we need to fix further problems as they arise. Thanks, Robin On Apr 30, 2015, at 8:01 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
On 30-Apr-15 09:32, Malcolm Hutty wrote:
Tagging too much as fundamental, and then needing to change it rapidly and frequently, would devalue the protection for those things for which there is no foreseeable reason to change them, and every reason to wish them to be deeply entrenched.
While the other reviews may be somewhat ephemeral and variable, the ATRT review should be very solid and tough to change, hence my recommendation that it, and no longer all the other imported AOC be fundamental. Originally I was proposing all AOC reviews should be. I could tell that did not have enough support and am suggesting that at least the ATRT get that status as it is fundamental to ongoing and sustainable accountability and transparency.
thanks
avri
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
On 30/04/2015 17:25, Robin Gross wrote:
This approach would also help to demonstrate to the larger community that ICANN does believe accountability and transparency to be among its most fundamental obligations in the course of its stewardship. It seems that this is a necessary commitment to have in place for all of ICANN's other undertakings to have legitimacy and to give us confidence and the tools we need to fix further problems as they arise.
Robin, "Fundamental" in this context doesn't mean "important", it means "immutable" - or at least "hard to change". I completely agree with the sentiment, but that is dealt with in the core values, which are held as "fundamental". Are you really sure you want to make the frequency of ATRT Reviews, or what they are called upon to look into, so deeply entrenched? Because that is the kind of thing covered here. Malcolm.
Thanks, Robin
On Apr 30, 2015, at 8:01 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
On 30-Apr-15 09:32, Malcolm Hutty wrote:
Tagging too much as fundamental, and then needing to change it rapidly and frequently, would devalue the protection for those things for which there is no foreseeable reason to change them, and every reason to wish them to be deeply entrenched.
While the other reviews may be somewhat ephemeral and variable, the ATRT review should be very solid and tough to change, hence my recommendation that it, and no longer all the other imported AOC be fundamental. Originally I was proposing all AOC reviews should be. I could tell that did not have enough support and am suggesting that at least the ATRT get that status as it is fundamental to ongoing and sustainable accountability and transparency.
thanks
avri
-- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/ London Internet Exchange Ltd 21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
I agree with Malcolm, we should be very selective and quite restrained when labelling bylaw articles as ³fundamental" Cheers, Roelof On 30-04-15 18:40, "Malcolm Hutty" <malcolm@linx.net> wrote:
On 30/04/2015 17:25, Robin Gross wrote:
This approach would also help to demonstrate to the larger community that ICANN does believe accountability and transparency to be among its most fundamental obligations in the course of its stewardship. It seems that this is a necessary commitment to have in place for all of ICANN's other undertakings to have legitimacy and to give us confidence and the tools we need to fix further problems as they arise.
Robin,
"Fundamental" in this context doesn't mean "important", it means "immutable" - or at least "hard to change".
I completely agree with the sentiment, but that is dealt with in the core values, which are held as "fundamental". Are you really sure you want to make the frequency of ATRT Reviews, or what they are called upon to look into, so deeply entrenched? Because that is the kind of thing covered here.
Malcolm.
Thanks, Robin
On Apr 30, 2015, at 8:01 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
Hi,
On 30-Apr-15 09:32, Malcolm Hutty wrote:
Tagging too much as fundamental, and then needing to change it rapidly and frequently, would devalue the protection for those things for which there is no foreseeable reason to change them, and every reason to wish them to be deeply entrenched.
While the other reviews may be somewhat ephemeral and variable, the ATRT review should be very solid and tough to change, hence my recommendation that it, and no longer all the other imported AOC be fundamental. Originally I was proposing all AOC reviews should be. I could tell that did not have enough support and am suggesting that at least the ATRT get that status as it is fundamental to ongoing and sustainable accountability and transparency.
thanks
avri
-- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/
London Internet Exchange Ltd 21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY
Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
participants (4)
-
Avri Doria -
Malcolm Hutty -
Robin Gross -
Roelof Meijer