Thank you for that confirmation. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC   "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey -----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 7:24 PM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China Yes. -----Original Message----- From: Phil Corwin [mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com] Sent: Friday, 25 December 2015 1:17 AM To: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: RE: Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China Bruce:

From your email it appears that the Board was briefed by Fadi on his role as Co-Chair of the Advisory Committee after it was publicly announced that he had accepted the position, indicating that the Board was not advised in advance of his decision to accept the role.

Is that a correct interpretation of the sequence of events? Thank you and best regards, Philip Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC   "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey -----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 6:07 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China Hello All, I have had a few requests for information on ICANN's participation in the World Internet Conference which was held in Wuzhen, China: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/cnleaders/2015WIC/ and http://www.wicwuzhen.cn/english ICANN sent a contingent to the conference as part of its Strategic Goal 1.2 "Bring ICANN to the world by creating a balanced and proactive approach to regional engagement with stakeholders." Fadi attended as CEO and gave a speech, and George Sadowsky attended as a Board member. Subsequent to the conference, the conference organizers announced that Fadi would co-chair a high level advisory committee for the next conference. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-12/18/c_134928240.htm The Board had a call with Fadi to get a briefing. Fadi has now posted a blog that notes that he has accepted this role in his personal capacity, and the advisory committee will meet after his term as CEO is completed in March 2016. See: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/my-transition-from-icann-ceo-an-update Regards, Bruce Tonkin _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15 _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15

Avri: I don't think this is a crisis, but it is a matter of judgment. Fadi was in Wuzhen on ICANN's dime. The Chinese press announcement of his Co-Chair role prominently touts his ICANN affiliation and thereby associates ICANN with the WIC. The WIC's objectives raises substantial questions about whether it is compatible with the MSM. And his post-ICANN role with a Chinese initiative that appears to favor multilateral IG may raise questions in Washington that could complicate lifting the freeze on the IANA transition. If I were a senior staff person I would want to give my Board advance notice of such a decision prior to its public announcement. But others may have a different POV. And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays! Best, Philip Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell Twitter: @VlawDC   "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey -----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 7:47 PM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China Hi, I do not understand the crisis over this decision. The guy took a volunteer position, why does the Board need to approve that or even be notified in advance. If it really bugs them, they can tell him to give it up or leave sooner. But why should they care? Is there some extraordinary expense to ICANN in this role? Or does it just not fit into an isolationist position many are taking toward ICANN participation in the larger Internet governance environment. Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over. avri On 24-Dec-15 09:47, Phil Corwin wrote:

Bruce:

...

From your email it appears that the Board was briefed by Fadi on his role as Co-Chair of the Advisory Committee after it was publicly announced that he had accepted the position, indicating that the Board was not advised in advance of his decision to accept the role.

Is that a correct interpretation of the sequence of events?

Thank you and best regards, Philip

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 6:07 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

Hello All,

I have had a few requests for information on ICANN's participation in the World Internet Conference which was held in Wuzhen, China: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/cnleaders/2015WIC/ and http://www.wicwuzhen.cn/english

ICANN sent a contingent to the conference as part of its Strategic Goal 1.2 "Bring ICANN to the world by creating a balanced and proactive approach to regional engagement with stakeholders."

Fadi attended as CEO and gave a speech, and George Sadowsky attended as a Board member.

Subsequent to the conference, the conference organizers announced that Fadi would co-chair a high level advisory committee for the next conference.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-12/18/c_134928240.htm

The Board had a call with Fadi to get a briefing.

Fadi has now posted a blog that notes that he has accepted this role in his personal capacity, and the advisory committee will meet after his term as CEO is completed in March 2016.

See: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/my-transition-from-icann-ceo-an-update

Regards, Bruce Tonkin

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

----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15 _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15

I do agree with Avri. Fadi would never accept anything that leads to an intergovernmental Internet Governance; at the contrary, I think it is a way to reinforce the MSM in the advisory committee, and in the World Internet Conference. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tijani BEN JEMAA Directeur Exécutif Fédération Méditerranéenne des associations d'Internet (FMAI) Phone: +216 98 330 114 +216 52 385 114 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Le 25 déc. 2015 à 03:01, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> a écrit :

I agree Phil. I think as well as global public interest, we should define personal capacity. I don't really think decision makers that have a prominent role in influencing people's views about the organization can do anything that is related to Internet governance and argue that it was in their personal capacity. the line is blurry, people get confused as everyone got confused in this occasion.

On 25 December 2015 at 02:10, Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com <mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com>> wrote: Avri:

I don't think this is a crisis, but it is a matter of judgment.

Fadi was in Wuzhen on ICANN's dime. The Chinese press announcement of his Co-Chair role prominently touts his ICANN affiliation and thereby associates ICANN with the WIC. The WIC's objectives raises substantial questions about whether it is compatible with the MSM. And his post-ICANN role with a Chinese initiative that appears to favor multilateral IG may raise questions in Washington that could complicate lifting the freeze on the IANA transition.

If I were a senior staff person I would want to give my Board advance notice of such a decision prior to its public announcement. But others may have a different POV.

And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

Best, Philip

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 7:47 PM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

Hi,

I do not understand the crisis over this decision. The guy took a volunteer position, why does the Board need to approve that or even be notified in advance. If it really bugs them, they can tell him to give it up or leave sooner. But why should they care? Is there some extraordinary expense to ICANN in this role? Or does it just not fit into an isolationist position many are taking toward ICANN participation in the larger Internet governance environment.

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

On 24-Dec-15 09:47, Phil Corwin wrote:

...

Bruce:

...

From your email it appears that the Board was briefed by Fadi on his role as Co-Chair of the Advisory Committee after it was publicly announced that he had accepted the position, indicating that the Board was not advised in advance of his decision to accept the role.

Is that a correct interpretation of the sequence of events?

Thank you and best regards, Philip

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 6:07 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

Hello All,

I have had a few requests for information on ICANN's participation in the World Internet Conference which was held in Wuzhen, China: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/cnleaders/2015WIC/ <http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/cnleaders/2015WIC/> and http://www.wicwuzhen.cn/english <http://www.wicwuzhen.cn/english>

ICANN sent a contingent to the conference as part of its Strategic Goal 1.2 "Bring ICANN to the world by creating a balanced and proactive approach to regional engagement with stakeholders."

Fadi attended as CEO and gave a speech, and George Sadowsky attended as a Board member.

Subsequent to the conference, the conference organizers announced that Fadi would co-chair a high level advisory committee for the next conference.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-12/18/c_134928240.htm <http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-12/18/c_134928240.htm>

The Board had a call with Fadi to get a briefing.

Fadi has now posted a blog that notes that he has accepted this role in his personal capacity, and the advisory committee will meet after his term as CEO is completed in March 2016.

See: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/my-transition-from-icann-ceo-an-update <https://www.icann.org/news/blog/my-transition-from-icann-ceo-an-update>

Regards, Bruce Tonkin

_______________________________________________ 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 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community>

----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15 _______________________________________________ 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 <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 <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 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community>

----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15 _______________________________________________ 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 <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community>

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

Hi, Seems all the more reason to get involved and try to stop them from achieving this goal. avri On 25-Dec-15 11:44, Phil Corwin wrote:

Really?

Check these links:

https://espresso.economist.com/c2cc4243fe2575474d57dfe7380fc9ef

The grand title is misleading: the gathering will not celebrate the joys of a borderless internet but promote “internet sovereignty”, a web made up of sovereign fiefs, gagged by official censors.

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/12/15/459834560/chinas-internet-f...

One important theme, even if it's not stated explicitly, is how governments can keep some level of control over the Internet…Hosting the meeting is the head of China's Cyberspace Administration, a former journalist named Lu Wei…He admitted that China does block some foreign websites, but he unapologetically asserted China's right to pick its friends and its business partners.

"We do not welcome those who make money from China and occupy our market while vilifying us," he said — a pointed reference to online criticism of China. "No family likes to invite unfriendly people to be their guests."

China blocks many websites without which the Internet would be unimaginable in the West — including Twitter, Facebook, The New York Times and YouTube — because the government cannot control their content….

/ /

http://www.techpolicydaily.com/technology/china-internet-governance/?utm_sou...

At the summit, China’s President Xi Jinping sent clear signals that China plans to continue to control its Internet borders, and called upon neighboring countries to support the right to do so. President Xi called for “cyber sovereignty,” advocating that individual countries should have the right to choose how and when to regulate the Internet inside their physical borders without interference by other governments. He outlined a digital future in which governments could set online standards and challenge the free flow of information and content across borders…In the eyes of the Chinese government, this type of “cyber sovereignty” trumps free expression for individuals…

* In his speech, President Xi called on governments to come together to agree on guiding principles for Internet governance, and only involving the non-governmental parts of today’s Internet community once these principles are already solidified….*

*China’s government-led approach to Internet governance is in direct conflict with today’s multi-stakeholder model, where all constituents of the online world – including NGOs, academia, the private sector, and technical experts – have seats at the table.*

*/ /*

Now some may respond that those are biased western views. So here’s the official Chinese perspective, from two editorials that ran in China Voice during WIC:

http://www.wuzhenwic.org/2015-12/16/c_47759.htm

The achievements partly rely on China's constant resolution to uphold cyber-sovereignty - an individual country's right to choose its own Internet regulation model - which biased Western critics decry as negating the open nature of the Internet…*Cyber-sovereignty is also key to the reform of the global Internet governance system where existing rules "hardly reflect the desires and interests of a majority of countries."*

With its distinct competitive edges in information technology, the U.S. has turned its tenet of "unilateral globalism" into the ugly "global unilateralism" to build a cyberspace governance system that is far from being fair and just.

*That's why Xi called for a reform of international cyberspace governance to one that features a multilateral approach*with multi-party participation rather than "one party calling the shots."

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-12/17/c_134927991.htm

Discussion of sovereignty over the Internet has long been a taboo, dismissed in Western media as violation of freedom…With so much discussion on the need to better guard cyber sovereignty and security, the criticisms of China's cyberspace sovereignty by media are irresponsible.

Some Western media or tech firms are not allowed in China because they are not willing to abide by Chinese laws. As a result, they may seize the World Internet Conference as another opportunity to show their grudges…The increasing number of users and the expanding market is the best evidence that China's policies are working. *Temporary measures to regulate cyberspace security will be meliorated and institutionalized in the future, regardless of wrong accusations from the outside*.

All my research indicates that the goals of WIC are to advance an agenda encompassing a multilateral model of Internet Governance and gain international blessing for a concept of cyber sovereignty that encompasses pervasive state surveillance and censorship.

Fadi may advocate for the MSM within that context, but it’s likely to be about as effective as preaching sobriety in a saloon.*//*

*Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal*

*Virtualaw LLC*

*1155 F Street, NW*

*Suite 1050*

*Washington, DC 20004*

*202-559-8597/Direct*

*202-559-8750/Fax*

*202-255-6172/cell***

* *

*Twitter: @VlawDC*

*/"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey/*

*From:*Tijani BEN JEMAA [mailto:tijani.benjemaa@benjemaa.com] *Sent:* Friday, December 25, 2015 11:12 AM *To:* farzaneh badii *Cc:* Phil Corwin; avri@acm.org; accountability-cross-community@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

I do agree with Avri. Fadi would never accept anything that leads to an intergovernmental Internet Governance; at the contrary, I think it is a way to reinforce the MSM in the advisory committee, and in the World Internet Conference.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Tijani BEN JEMAA*

Directeur Exécutif

Fédération Méditerranéenne des associations d'Internet (*FMAI*)

Phone: +216 98 330 114

+216 52 385 114

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Le 25 déc. 2015 à 03:01, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com <mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>> a écrit :

I agree Phil. I think as well as global public interest, we should define personal capacity. I don't really think decision makers that have a prominent role in influencing people's views about the organization can do anything that is related to Internet governance and argue that it was in their personal capacity. the line is blurry, people get confused as everyone got confused in this occasion.

On 25 December 2015 at 02:10, Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com <mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com>> wrote:

Avri:

I don't think this is a crisis, but it is a matter of judgment.

Fadi was in Wuzhen on ICANN's dime. The Chinese press announcement of his Co-Chair role prominently touts his ICANN affiliation and thereby associates ICANN with the WIC. The WIC's objectives raises substantial questions about whether it is compatible with the MSM. And his post-ICANN role with a Chinese initiative that appears to favor multilateral IG may raise questions in Washington that could complicate lifting the freeze on the IANA transition.

If I were a senior staff person I would want to give my Board advance notice of such a decision prior to its public announcement. But others may have a different POV.

And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

Best, Philip

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 7:47 PM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>

Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

Hi,

I do not understand the crisis over this decision. The guy took a volunteer position, why does the Board need to approve that or even be notified in advance. If it really bugs them, they can tell him to give it up or leave sooner. But why should they care? Is there some extraordinary expense to ICANN in this role? Or does it just not fit into an isolationist position many are taking toward ICANN participation in the larger Internet governance environment.

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

On 24-Dec-15 09:47, Phil Corwin wrote: > Bruce: > > >From your email it appears that the Board was briefed by Fadi on his role as Co-Chair of the Advisory Committee after it was publicly announced that he had accepted the position, indicating that the Board was not advised in advance of his decision to accept the role. > > Is that a correct interpretation of the sequence of events? > > Thank you and best regards, > Philip > > Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal > Virtualaw LLC > 1155 F Street, NW > Suite 1050 > Washington, DC 20004 > 202-559-8597/Direct > 202-559-8750/Fax > 202-255-6172/cell > > Twitter: @VlawDC > > "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey > > > -----Original Message----- > From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> > [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of > Bruce Tonkin > Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 6:07 AM > To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> > Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in > China > > > Hello All, > > I have had a few requests for information on ICANN's participation in > the World Internet Conference which was held in Wuzhen, China: > http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/cnleaders/2015WIC/ and > http://www.wicwuzhen.cn/english > > ICANN sent a contingent to the conference as part of its Strategic Goal 1.2 "Bring ICANN to the world by creating a balanced and proactive approach to regional engagement with stakeholders." > > Fadi attended as CEO and gave a speech, and George Sadowsky attended as a Board member. > > Subsequent to the conference, the conference organizers announced that Fadi would co-chair a high level advisory committee for the next conference. > > http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-12/18/c_134928240.htm > > The Board had a call with Fadi to get a briefing. > > Fadi has now posted a blog that notes that he has accepted this role in his personal capacity, and the advisory committee will meet after his term as CEO is completed in March 2016. > > See: > https://www.icann.org/news/blog/my-transition-from-icann-ceo-an-update > > Regards, > Bruce Tonkin > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> > Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: > 12/19/15 _______________________________________________ > 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 <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15 _______________________________________________ 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

--

Farzaneh

_______________________________________________ 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

------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15

--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Phil, I don't wish to minimize your research as to the goals of the WIC. When I went to Beijing a decade and a half ago several million instances of IE were sourcing packet trains to North America for some, perhaps all, Han script strings input to that browser's navigation field. The root cause, a bug in the UTF8 handling code, caused recurring trans-pacific traffic for resources which should have been completely resolved without generating any trans-pacific traffic after the first (or periodic) cached reference, resulting in substantial hard currency (USD) settlement costs. Keep in mind it was only at the Brussels meeting in 2010 that ICANN allowed the .cn operator (and others similarly situated) the means to begin to offer Han Script namespaces, finally obviating the niche for browser hacks, of which the IE+3rd-parties "IDN solution" cited above was just one instance -- so this was then a problem with an unknown, but likely to be long, estimated time to repair -- and given the inability to resolve similar issues in the IETF (e.g., the intermediate tables proposal to fix errors introduced by merging the traditional and simplified Han scripts), the decision to reduce the then present IE UTF8 bug cost arising from reliance upon North American resolution resources and anticipate similar externalities via the publication of a (very modest) extension of the IANA generated data and illuminating a set of authoritative servers, was, and remains, a rational engineering decision. For completeness, in that period the USG sought assistance from the government of China to suppress "software piracy", in particular the common practice of local duplication of licensed binary products, e.g., MS Windows and the then-bundled-in (inherently defective in China, and elsewhere) version of IE, and, from the technology informed CN point of view available to me, autonomous development of alternate commercial commodity operating system products. I bring this up to make three points: First, as I've mentioned previously, we have an interest in being well-informed about operations by others, and the reasons those operator(s) feel compelled to engage in specific operations, such as expensive and unfixable-by-license bugs in mass market DNS-aware products. Second, we have an interest in distinguishing those means of control over specific names, specific content, and specific prefixes within the general technically coordinated system, and those means of control over general resource access, generally affecting or replacing some system. Third, the policy goals of other operators implemented by general mechanisms and specific mechanisms may agree with, as well as differ from, those of the NTIA and its for-profit and not-for-profit contractors, and where there is agreement, e.g., general availability of Han Script namespace products, such mechanisms may be asynchronously implemented. All this is preamble to a personal observation that ICANN's CEO and some Board and Staff should contribute to other sources of technical coordination policy development, preferably, more gracefully than the previous CEO's attempt at this truly critical mission, and that the motives, and mechanisms, of operators and their regulators are best viewed on their specific merits. The word "sovereignty" can mean advancing local, rather than remote, literacy through identifiers, just as well as advancing local, rather than remote, elites and their agendas. I suggest we share the interest in literacy through identifiers, independent of the mechanism preemption exercised by the NTIA's for-profit contractor, any other policy goal restricting access to data. Next, turning to the Multi-Stakeholder vs Multi-Lateral Models (MSM vs MLM), we already have quite a lot of the latter in the exceptions now made in consequence of regional data protection law, the subject of frequent RAA Amendment notices from Krista, and we've had nascent, and eventually realized MLM policy development through the Chinese Domain Name Consortium CDNC (.cn, .hk, .tw, .sg), the Joint Engineering Team JET (.jp, .kr, cn, .tw), etc. These are unlikely to have exhausted the interests of concerned governments in cooperation, generally for ends consistent with literacy, a shared policy goal, as well as other not necessarily shared policy goals. Thank you for your time today. Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon On 12/25/15 8:44 AM, Phil Corwin wrote:

Really?

Check these links:

https://espresso.economist.com/c2cc4243fe2575474d57dfe7380fc9ef

The grand title is misleading: the gathering will not celebrate the joys of a borderless internet but promote “internet sovereignty”, a web made up of sovereign fiefs, gagged by official censors.

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/12/15/459834560/chinas-internet-f...

One important theme, even if it's not stated explicitly, is how governments can keep some level of control over the Internet…Hosting the meeting is the head of China's Cyberspace Administration, a former journalist named Lu Wei…He admitted that China does block some foreign websites, but he unapologetically asserted China's right to pick its friends and its business partners.

"We do not welcome those who make money from China and occupy our market while vilifying us," he said — a pointed reference to online criticism of China. "No family likes to invite unfriendly people to be their guests."

China blocks many websites without which the Internet would be unimaginable in the West — including Twitter, Facebook, The New York Times and YouTube — because the government cannot control their content….

//

http://www.techpolicydaily.com/technology/china-internet-governance/?utm_sou...

At the summit, China’s President Xi Jinping sent clear signals that China plans to continue to control its Internet borders, and called upon neighboring countries to support the right to do so. President Xi called for “cyber sovereignty,” advocating that individual countries should have the right to choose how and when to regulate the Internet inside their physical borders without interference by other governments. He outlined a digital future in which governments could set online standards and challenge the free flow of information and content across borders…In the eyes of the Chinese government, this type of “cyber sovereignty” trumps free expression for individuals…

* In his speech, President Xi called on governments to come together to agree on guiding principles for Internet governance, and only involving the non-governmental parts of today’s Internet community once these principles are already solidified….*

*China’s government-led approach to Internet governance is in direct conflict with today’s multi-stakeholder model, where all constituents of the online world – including NGOs, academia, the private sector, and technical experts – have seats at the table.*

*//*

Now some may respond that those are biased western views. So here’s the official Chinese perspective, from two editorials that ran in China Voice during WIC:

http://www.wuzhenwic.org/2015-12/16/c_47759.htm

The achievements partly rely on China's constant resolution to uphold cyber-sovereignty - an individual country's right to choose its own Internet regulation model - which biased Western critics decry as negating the open nature of the Internet…*Cyber-sovereignty is also key to the reform of the global Internet governance system where existing rules "hardly reflect the desires and interests of a majority of countries."*

With its distinct competitive edges in information technology, the U.S. has turned its tenet of "unilateral globalism" into the ugly "global unilateralism" to build a cyberspace governance system that is far from being fair and just.

*That's why Xi called for a reform of international cyberspace governance to one that features a multilateral approach*with multi-party participation rather than "one party calling the shots."

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-12/17/c_134927991.htm

Discussion of sovereignty over the Internet has long been a taboo, dismissed in Western media as violation of freedom…With so much discussion on the need to better guard cyber sovereignty and security, the criticisms of China's cyberspace sovereignty by media are irresponsible.

Some Western media or tech firms are not allowed in China because they are not willing to abide by Chinese laws. As a result, they may seize the World Internet Conference as another opportunity to show their grudges…The increasing number of users and the expanding market is the best evidence that China's policies are working. *Temporary measures to regulate cyberspace security will be meliorated and institutionalized in the future, regardless of wrong accusations from the outside*.

All my research indicates that the goals of WIC are to advance an agenda encompassing a multilateral model of Internet Governance and gain international blessing for a concept of cyber sovereignty that encompasses pervasive state surveillance and censorship.

Fadi may advocate for the MSM within that context, but it’s likely to be about as effective as preaching sobriety in a saloon.*//*

*Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal*

*Virtualaw LLC*

*1155 F Street, NW*

*Suite 1050*

*Washington, DC 20004*

*202-559-8597/Direct*

*202-559-8750/Fax*

*202-255-6172/cell***

**

*Twitter: @VlawDC*

*/"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey/*

*From:*Tijani BEN JEMAA [mailto:tijani.benjemaa@benjemaa.com] *Sent:* Friday, December 25, 2015 11:12 AM *To:* farzaneh badii *Cc:* Phil Corwin; avri@acm.org; accountability-cross-community@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

I do agree with Avri. Fadi would never accept anything that leads to an intergovernmental Internet Governance; at the contrary, I think it is a way to reinforce the MSM in the advisory committee, and in the World Internet Conference.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Tijani BEN JEMAA*

Directeur Exécutif

Fédération Méditerranéenne des associations d'Internet (*FMAI*)

Phone: +216 98 330 114

+216 52 385 114

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Le 25 déc. 2015 à 03:01, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com <mailto:farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>> a écrit :

I agree Phil. I think as well as global public interest, we should define personal capacity. I don't really think decision makers that have a prominent role in influencing people's views about the organization can do anything that is related to Internet governance and argue that it was in their personal capacity. the line is blurry, people get confused as everyone got confused in this occasion.

On 25 December 2015 at 02:10, Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com <mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com>> wrote:

Avri:

I don't think this is a crisis, but it is a matter of judgment.

Fadi was in Wuzhen on ICANN's dime. The Chinese press announcement of his Co-Chair role prominently touts his ICANN affiliation and thereby associates ICANN with the WIC. The WIC's objectives raises substantial questions about whether it is compatible with the MSM. And his post-ICANN role with a Chinese initiative that appears to favor multilateral IG may raise questions in Washington that could complicate lifting the freeze on the IANA transition.

If I were a senior staff person I would want to give my Board advance notice of such a decision prior to its public announcement. But others may have a different POV.

And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

Best, Philip

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 7:47 PM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org>

Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

Hi,

I do not understand the crisis over this decision. The guy took a volunteer position, why does the Board need to approve that or even be notified in advance. If it really bugs them, they can tell him to give it up or leave sooner. But why should they care? Is there some extraordinary expense to ICANN in this role? Or does it just not fit into an isolationist position many are taking toward ICANN participation in the larger Internet governance environment.

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

On 24-Dec-15 09:47, Phil Corwin wrote: > Bruce: > > >From your email it appears that the Board was briefed by Fadi on his role as Co-Chair of the Advisory Committee after it was publicly announced that he had accepted the position, indicating that the Board was not advised in advance of his decision to accept the role. > > Is that a correct interpretation of the sequence of events? > > Thank you and best regards, > Philip > > Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal > Virtualaw LLC > 1155 F Street, NW > Suite 1050 > Washington, DC 20004 > 202-559-8597/Direct > 202-559-8750/Fax > 202-255-6172/cell > > Twitter: @VlawDC > > "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey > > > -----Original Message----- > From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> > [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org>] On Behalf Of > Bruce Tonkin > Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 6:07 AM > To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> > Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in > China > > > Hello All, > > I have had a few requests for information on ICANN's participation in > the World Internet Conference which was held in Wuzhen, China: > http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/cnleaders/2015WIC/ and > http://www.wicwuzhen.cn/english > > ICANN sent a contingent to the conference as part of its Strategic Goal 1.2 "Bring ICANN to the world by creating a balanced and proactive approach to regional engagement with stakeholders." > > Fadi attended as CEO and gave a speech, and George Sadowsky attended as a Board member. > > Subsequent to the conference, the conference organizers announced that Fadi would co-chair a high level advisory committee for the next conference. > > http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-12/18/c_134928240.htm > > The Board had a call with Fadi to get a briefing. > > Fadi has now posted a blog that notes that he has accepted this role in his personal capacity, and the advisory committee will meet after his term as CEO is completed in March 2016. > > See: > https://www.icann.org/news/blog/my-transition-from-icann-ceo-an-update > > Regards, > Bruce Tonkin > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> > Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: > 12/19/15 _______________________________________________ > 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 <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15 _______________________________________________ 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

--

Farzaneh

_______________________________________________ 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

------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15

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

Dear All, On related point of Internet Principles, please refer question below that I posed to ICANN Board during the Public Forum in Dublin meeting, and answer thereof . *QUESTION:* ICANN Strategic Plan for fiscal years 2016 – 2020, page 22 mentions that ICANN encourages all stakeholders to implement the principles endorsed at NETmundial. a. Is the endorsement of NETmundial principles, thereby endorsing definition of each principle, from a bottom up process or by Board decision or any defined process? b. And since following well defined principles are core to Internet operations, whether ICANN, going forward, would consider framing its own set of Internet Principles through a bottom up process or by adopting any existing set after community consultation? Why/ Why not? *ANSWER:* *The NETmundial principles were created during the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance held in São Paulo, Brazil, on 23-24 April 2014. The meeting, organized in a partnership between the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br <http://cgi.br/>) and 1/Net, brought together 1,480 stakeholders from 97 countries. ICANN's leadership, the ICANN board and the ICANN community were among the participants.* *The meeting’s non-binding outcome document <http://netmundial.br/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/NETmundial-Multistakeholder-...> — produced through an open, collaborative, bottom-up process and with equal participation by all stakeholders — contained a shared set of principles and a roadmap to guide the evolution of Internet cooperation and governance.* *The NETmundial principles are not narrowly prescriptive. They are high-level statements that permeate through the work of any entity that is interested in preserving and advancing the multistakeholder model of Internet governance and policymaking. This is particularly the case for a multistakeholder entity like ICANN.* *Endorsement for the NETmundial principles implies general support for their positive contributions to the multisakeholder model. It is not an endorsement for every word contained in those principles. Each entity shall exercise its own judgment in determining which principles are most relevant and how they apply to specific circumstances.* *With regard to whether ICANN would consider framing its own set of principles, such an initiative would have to be community-driven. ICANN is not in a position to unilaterally require the multistakeholder community to develop any specific principles or guidelines. The ongoing accountability work through the CCWG-Accountability is one example of such an initiative. We strongly encourage interested parties to get involved in the CCWG work and determine whether or not it addresses some of the concerns raised. * *------------------------* Should an organization like ICANN define Internet Principles it believes in, that form core of its operations, than just endorsing NETMundial principles? I believe it should. It will help set standards and further enhance accountability. Would like to invite views from members if we should initiate work on this as part of CCWG Accountability process. Thanks & Regards, Rahul Sharma On 25 December 2015 at 22:14, Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com> wrote:

Really?

Check these links:

https://espresso.economist.com/c2cc4243fe2575474d57dfe7380fc9ef

The grand title is misleading: the gathering will not celebrate the joys of a borderless internet but promote “internet sovereignty”, a web made up of sovereign fiefs, gagged by official censors.

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/12/15/459834560/chinas-internet-f...

One important theme, even if it's not stated explicitly, is how governments can keep some level of control over the Internet… Hosting the meeting is the head of China's Cyberspace Administration, a former journalist named Lu Wei… He admitted that China does block some foreign websites, but he unapologetically asserted China's right to pick its friends and its business partners.

"We do not welcome those who make money from China and occupy our market while vilifying us," he said — a pointed reference to online criticism of China. "No family likes to invite unfriendly people to be their guests."

China blocks many websites without which the Internet would be unimaginable in the West — including Twitter, Facebook, The New York Times and YouTube — because the government cannot control their content….

http://www.techpolicydaily.com/technology/china-internet-governance/?utm_sou...

At the summit, China’s President Xi Jinping sent clear signals that China plans to continue to control its Internet borders, and called upon neighboring countries to support the right to do so. President Xi called for “cyber sovereignty,” advocating that individual countries should have the right to choose how and when to regulate the Internet inside their physical borders without interference by other governments. He outlined a digital future in which governments could set online standards and challenge the free flow of information and content across borders… In the eyes of the Chinese government, this type of “cyber sovereignty” trumps free expression for individuals…

* In his speech, President Xi called on governments to come together to agree on guiding principles for Internet governance, and only involving the non-governmental parts of today’s Internet community once these principles are already solidified….*

*China’s government-led approach to Internet governance is in direct conflict with today’s multi-stakeholder model, where all constituents of the online world – including NGOs, academia, the private sector, and technical experts – have seats at the table.*

Now some may respond that those are biased western views. So here’s the official Chinese perspective, from two editorials that ran in China Voice during WIC:

http://www.wuzhenwic.org/2015-12/16/c_47759.htm

The achievements partly rely on China's constant resolution to uphold cyber-sovereignty - an individual country's right to choose its own Internet regulation model - which biased Western critics decry as negating the open nature of the Internet… *Cyber-sovereignty is also key to the reform of the global Internet governance system where existing rules "hardly reflect the desires and interests of a majority of countries."*

With its distinct competitive edges in information technology, the U.S. has turned its tenet of "unilateral globalism" into the ugly "global unilateralism" to build a cyberspace governance system that is far from being fair and just.

*That's why Xi called for a reform of international cyberspace governance to one that features a multilateral approach* with multi-party participation rather than "one party calling the shots."

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-12/17/c_134927991.htm

Discussion of sovereignty over the Internet has long been a taboo, dismissed in Western media as violation of freedom… With so much discussion on the need to better guard cyber sovereignty and security, the criticisms of China's cyberspace sovereignty by media are irresponsible.

Some Western media or tech firms are not allowed in China because they are not willing to abide by Chinese laws. As a result, they may seize the World Internet Conference as another opportunity to show their grudges… The increasing number of users and the expanding market is the best evidence that China's policies are working. *Temporary measures to regulate cyberspace security will be meliorated and institutionalized in the future, regardless of wrong accusations from the outside*.

All my research indicates that the goals of WIC are to advance an agenda encompassing a multilateral model of Internet Governance and gain international blessing for a concept of cyber sovereignty that encompasses pervasive state surveillance and censorship.

Fadi may advocate for the MSM within that context, but it’s likely to be about as effective as preaching sobriety in a saloon.

*Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal*

*Virtualaw LLC*

*1155 F Street, NW*

*Suite 1050*

*Washington, DC 20004*

*202-559-8597/Direct*

*202-559-8750/Fax*

*202-255-6172/cell*

*Twitter: @VlawDC*

*"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey*

*From:* Tijani BEN JEMAA [mailto:tijani.benjemaa@benjemaa.com] *Sent:* Friday, December 25, 2015 11:12 AM *To:* farzaneh badii *Cc:* Phil Corwin; avri@acm.org; accountability-cross-community@icann.org

*Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

I do agree with Avri. Fadi would never accept anything that leads to an intergovernmental Internet Governance; at the contrary, I think it is a way to reinforce the MSM in the advisory committee, and in the World Internet Conference.

--------------------------------------- --------------------------------------

*Tijani BEN JEMAA*

Directeur Exécutif

Fédération Méditerranéenne des associations d'Internet (*FMAI*)

Phone: +216 98 330 114

+216 52 385 114

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Le 25 déc. 2015 à 03:01, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> a écrit :

I agree Phil. I think as well as global public interest, we should define personal capacity. I don't really think decision makers that have a prominent role in influencing people's views about the organization can do anything that is related to Internet governance and argue that it was in their personal capacity. the line is blurry, people get confused as everyone got confused in this occasion.

On 25 December 2015 at 02:10, Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com> wrote:

Avri:

I don't think this is a crisis, but it is a matter of judgment.

Fadi was in Wuzhen on ICANN's dime. The Chinese press announcement of his Co-Chair role prominently touts his ICANN affiliation and thereby associates ICANN with the WIC. The WIC's objectives raises substantial questions about whether it is compatible with the MSM. And his post-ICANN role with a Chinese initiative that appears to favor multilateral IG may raise questions in Washington that could complicate lifting the freeze on the IANA transition.

If I were a senior staff person I would want to give my Board advance notice of such a decision prior to its public announcement. But others may have a different POV.

And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

Best, Philip

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 7:47 PM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org

Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

Hi,

I do not understand the crisis over this decision. The guy took a volunteer position, why does the Board need to approve that or even be notified in advance. If it really bugs them, they can tell him to give it up or leave sooner. But why should they care? Is there some extraordinary expense to ICANN in this role? Or does it just not fit into an isolationist position many are taking toward ICANN participation in the larger Internet governance environment.

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

On 24-Dec-15 09:47, Phil Corwin wrote:

...

Bruce:

...

From your email it appears that the Board was briefed by Fadi on his role as Co-Chair of the Advisory Committee after it was publicly announced that he had accepted the position, indicating that the Board was not advised in advance of his decision to accept the role.

Is that a correct interpretation of the sequence of events?

Thank you and best regards, Philip

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 6:07 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

Hello All,

I have had a few requests for information on ICANN's participation in the World Internet Conference which was held in Wuzhen, China: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/cnleaders/2015WIC/ and http://www.wicwuzhen.cn/english

ICANN sent a contingent to the conference as part of its Strategic Goal 1.2 "Bring ICANN to the world by creating a balanced and proactive approach to regional engagement with stakeholders."

Fadi attended as CEO and gave a speech, and George Sadowsky attended as a Board member.

Subsequent to the conference, the conference organizers announced that Fadi would co-chair a high level advisory committee for the next conference.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-12/18/c_134928240.htm

The Board had a call with Fadi to get a briefing.

Fadi has now posted a blog that notes that he has accepted this role in his personal capacity, and the advisory committee will meet after his term as CEO is completed in March 2016.

See: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/my-transition-from-icann-ceo-an-update

Regards, Bruce Tonkin

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

----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15 _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15 _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

--

Farzaneh

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

------------------------------

No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15

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

Why is ANYONE but me surprised that that Chehadé-Waffler is primarily concerned by his own (financial) interests? el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini

On 25 Dec 2015, at 03:10, Phil Corwin <psc@vlaw-dc.com> wrote:

Avri:

I don't think this is a crisis, but it is a matter of judgment.

Fadi was in Wuzhen on ICANN's dime. The Chinese press announcement of his Co-Chair role prominently touts his ICANN affiliation and thereby associates ICANN with the WIC. The WIC's objectives raises substantial questions about whether it is compatible with the MSM. And his post-ICANN role with a Chinese initiative that appears to favor multilateral IG may raise questions in Washington that could complicate lifting the freeze on the IANA transition.

If I were a senior staff person I would want to give my Board advance notice of such a decision prior to its public announcement. But others may have a different POV.

And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

Best, Philip

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 7:47 PM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

Hi,

I do not understand the crisis over this decision. The guy took a volunteer position, why does the Board need to approve that or even be notified in advance. If it really bugs them, they can tell him to give it up or leave sooner. But why should they care? Is there some extraordinary expense to ICANN in this role? Or does it just not fit into an isolationist position many are taking toward ICANN participation in the larger Internet governance environment.

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

...

On 24-Dec-15 09:47, Phil Corwin wrote: Bruce:

...

From your email it appears that the Board was briefed by Fadi on his role as Co-Chair of the Advisory Committee after it was publicly announced that he had accepted the position, indicating that the Board was not advised in advance of his decision to accept the role.

Is that a correct interpretation of the sequence of events?

Thank you and best regards, Philip

Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell

Twitter: @VlawDC

"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey

-----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 6:07 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

Hello All,

I have had a few requests for information on ICANN's participation in the World Internet Conference which was held in Wuzhen, China: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/cnleaders/2015WIC/ and http://www.wicwuzhen.cn/english

ICANN sent a contingent to the conference as part of its Strategic Goal 1.2 "Bring ICANN to the world by creating a balanced and proactive approach to regional engagement with stakeholders."

Fadi attended as CEO and gave a speech, and George Sadowsky attended as a Board member.

Subsequent to the conference, the conference organizers announced that Fadi would co-chair a high level advisory committee for the next conference.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-12/18/c_134928240.htm

The Board had a call with Fadi to get a briefing.

Fadi has now posted a blog that notes that he has accepted this role in his personal capacity, and the advisory committee will meet after his term as CEO is completed in March 2016.

See: https://www.icann.org/news/blog/my-transition-from-icann-ceo-an-update

Regards, Bruce Tonkin

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

----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15 _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11213 - Release Date: 12/19/15 _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come from, any public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi is) who did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal. While acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity -- none at all. At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so stringent that it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable test) so clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role with the private role was virtually non-existent. For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this story: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the-revena nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c5-11e5 -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html. A minor Federal official wrote "The Revenant" before he joined the government. Now, the book is a major movie just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. In the normal course of events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be doing publicity for the film. Here, the author cannot -- because he is a Deputy Trade Representative of the US. Now, I don't know about you, but for me the likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the USTR office and draw an inference of official US government approval is vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a place where the officials private life could diverge from his public responsibility. But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for his movie. As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is clearly much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his new "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN -- which is of course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted. Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably tone deaf. I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your public position works both ways. We worry not only about the new "private" connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that the official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to benefit his future private actions rather than the public interest. It isn't the connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) -- it is the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made while the public official was still working for the public that raises the questions. Paul Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key -----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected better from Mr Chehade' in that department Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent previous CEOs. Certainly not from Paul. In fact not even from Rod, who despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways was, in many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures! In China, relationships matter. Appearance matters. A lot. Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than the 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the discussion with the relevant actors inside China. The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' for peccadilloes). So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't see the problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here. I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet once again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'. A CEO can never be in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.) The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his resignation, choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in another revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently completely different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive statements of them and their backers. Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'. UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations that operate in the same sphere. Why, in the name of accountabaility, does ICANN still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible optics of Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous. Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count. Hardly at all. It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more than 'what', or even 'why'.

' And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

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

Might be the reason why someone like Fadi is actually NOT working for you... And no, I do not agree at all that this is a "great example of lack of accountability" Best, Roelof Meijer On 26-12-15 13:19, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net> wrote:

Paul

If Fadi worked for me, then his leaving date would just have been brought forward dramatically, and he would have, as we say in the UK, found a number of pressing reasons to spend more time with the family.

But the Board don't collectively have the cojones to do that.

That's not really a criticism of the institution or the current members of it, just a recognition of how much power that the Board of non-profits (don't) have over their General Manager (as I saw over 20 years ago as a board member of the Radio Society of Great Britain, which despite being an office I could trace back in history to a certain Sr. Marconi, had exactly the same level of power(lessness) than the ICANN Board has, in some aspects).

Indeed, were I an ICANN Board member I might take that view -- in that the damage to the organisation from further inflaming the situation might be greater than just crossing my fingers and waiting for the problem to go away naturally in the Spring.

However, it's a great example of lack of accountability, wouldn't you agree?

On 25/12/15 15:33, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:

...

We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come from, any public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi is) who did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal. While acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity -- none at all. At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so stringent that it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable test) so clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role with the private role was virtually non-existent.

For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this story:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the-rev ena

nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c5-1 1e5 -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html. A minor Federal official wrote "The Revenant" before he joined the government. Now, the book is a major movie just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. In the normal course of events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be doing publicity for the film. Here, the author cannot -- because he is a Deputy Trade Representative of the US. Now, I don't know about you, but for me the likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the USTR office and draw an inference of official US government approval is vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a place where the officials private life could diverge from his public responsibility. But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for his movie.

As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is clearly much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his new "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN -- which is of course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted. Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably tone deaf.

I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your public position works both ways. We worry not only about the new "private" connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that the official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to benefit his future private actions rather than the public interest. It isn't the connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) -- it is the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made while the public official was still working for the public that raises the questions.

Paul

Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key

-----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

...

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected better from Mr Chehade' in that department

Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent previous CEOs. Certainly not from Paul. In fact not even from Rod, who despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways was, in many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures!

In China, relationships matter.

Appearance matters. A lot.

Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than the 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the discussion with the relevant actors inside China.

The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' for peccadilloes).

So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't see the problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here.

I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet once again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'. A CEO can never be in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.)

The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his resignation, choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in another revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently completely different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive statements of them and their backers.

Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'.

UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations that operate in the same sphere. Why, in the name of accountabaility, does ICANN still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible optics of Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous.

Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count.

Hardly at all.

It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more than 'what', or even 'why'.

...

' And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

Likewise.

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

1+ to Roelof. And Happy New Year Wolfgang -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org im Auftrag von Roelof Meijer Gesendet: Mo 28.12.2015 16:04 An: Nigel Roberts; Paul Rosenzweig; accountability-cross-community@icann.org Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China Might be the reason why someone like Fadi is actually NOT working for you... And no, I do not agree at all that this is a "great example of lack of accountability" Best, Roelof Meijer On 26-12-15 13:19, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net> wrote:

Paul

If Fadi worked for me, then his leaving date would just have been brought forward dramatically, and he would have, as we say in the UK, found a number of pressing reasons to spend more time with the family.

But the Board don't collectively have the cojones to do that.

That's not really a criticism of the institution or the current members of it, just a recognition of how much power that the Board of non-profits (don't) have over their General Manager (as I saw over 20 years ago as a board member of the Radio Society of Great Britain, which despite being an office I could trace back in history to a certain Sr. Marconi, had exactly the same level of power(lessness) than the ICANN Board has, in some aspects).

Indeed, were I an ICANN Board member I might take that view -- in that the damage to the organisation from further inflaming the situation might be greater than just crossing my fingers and waiting for the problem to go away naturally in the Spring.

However, it's a great example of lack of accountability, wouldn't you agree?

On 25/12/15 15:33, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:

...

We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come from, any public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi is) who did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal. While acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity -- none at all. At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so stringent that it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable test) so clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role with the private role was virtually non-existent.

For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this story:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the-rev ena

nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c5-1 1e5 -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html. A minor Federal official wrote "The Revenant" before he joined the government. Now, the book is a major movie just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. In the normal course of events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be doing publicity for the film. Here, the author cannot -- because he is a Deputy Trade Representative of the US. Now, I don't know about you, but for me the likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the USTR office and draw an inference of official US government approval is vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a place where the officials private life could diverge from his public responsibility. But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for his movie.

As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is clearly much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his new "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN -- which is of course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted. Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably tone deaf.

I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your public position works both ways. We worry not only about the new "private" connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that the official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to benefit his future private actions rather than the public interest. It isn't the connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) -- it is the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made while the public official was still working for the public that raises the questions.

Paul

Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key

-----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

...

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected better from Mr Chehade' in that department

Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent previous CEOs. Certainly not from Paul. In fact not even from Rod, who despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways was, in many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures!

In China, relationships matter.

Appearance matters. A lot.

Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than the 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the discussion with the relevant actors inside China.

The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' for peccadilloes).

So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't see the problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here.

I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet once again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'. A CEO can never be in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.)

The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his resignation, choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in another revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently completely different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive statements of them and their backers.

Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'.

UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations that operate in the same sphere. Why, in the name of accountabaility, does ICANN still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible optics of Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous.

Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count.

Hardly at all.

It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more than 'what', or even 'why'.

...

' And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

Likewise.

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

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

Hi, On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 09:34:58AM -0600, Carlos Raul wrote:

For those critical of his entrepreneurship

Given this remark, I'm wondering what you think of the attempts by the CCWG to make explicit the limited mission of ICANN. What role do you think ICANN ought to have such that it needs an entrepreneur as CEO? (In case it's not clear, I don't mean this as in any way a rhetorical question. I'm trying to understand.) Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com

Here’s my view of ICANN and Fadi’s support for the Chinese Wuzhen Internet Conference. (Spoiler: it’s not about Fadi) http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/12/29/the-chinese-netmundial-initiati... From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Raul Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 10:35 AM To: Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> Cc: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China @Roelof +1 on the last comment. Having somebody as bright as Fadi but choking his efforts to follow up on the IMHO GREAT results of the Net Mundial meeting in Brazil, has been the main explanation to me on why he is leaving. For those critical of his entrepreneurship they may consider NOT hiring private sector CEOs in the future, but "secretary general" type of management that just follow up orders. Happy holidays Carlos Raul On Dec 28, 2015 9:05 AM, "Roelof Meijer" <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl<mailto:Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl>> wrote: Might be the reason why someone like Fadi is actually NOT working for you... And no, I do not agree at all that this is a "great example of lack of accountability" Best, Roelof Meijer On 26-12-15 13<tel:26-12-15%2013>:19, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net<mailto:nigel@channelisles.net>> wrote:

Paul

If Fadi worked for me, then his leaving date would just have been brought forward dramatically, and he would have, as we say in the UK, found a number of pressing reasons to spend more time with the family.

But the Board don't collectively have the cojones to do that.

That's not really a criticism of the institution or the current members of it, just a recognition of how much power that the Board of non-profits (don't) have over their General Manager (as I saw over 20 years ago as a board member of the Radio Society of Great Britain, which despite being an office I could trace back in history to a certain Sr. Marconi, had exactly the same level of power(lessness) than the ICANN Board has, in some aspects).

Indeed, were I an ICANN Board member I might take that view -- in that the damage to the organisation from further inflaming the situation might be greater than just crossing my fingers and waiting for the problem to go away naturally in the Spring.

However, it's a great example of lack of accountability, wouldn't you agree?

On 25/12/15 15:33, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:

...

We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come from, any public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi is) who did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal. While acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity -- none at all. At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so stringent that it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable test) so clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role with the private role was virtually non-existent.

For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this story:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the-rev ena

nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c5-1 1e5 -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html. A minor Federal official wrote "The Revenant" before he joined the government. Now, the book is a major movie just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. In the normal course of events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be doing publicity for the film. Here, the author cannot -- because he is a Deputy Trade Representative of the US. Now, I don't know about you, but for me the likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the USTR office and draw an inference of official US government approval is vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a place where the officials private life could diverge from his public responsibility. But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for his movie.

As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is clearly much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his new "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN -- which is of course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted. Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably tone deaf.

I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your public position works both ways. We worry not only about the new "private" connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that the official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to benefit his future private actions rather than the public interest. It isn't the connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) -- it is the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made while the public official was still working for the public that raises the questions.

Paul

Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com<mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> O: +1 (202) 547-0660<tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20547-0660> M: +1 (202) 329-9650<tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20329-9650> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739<tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20738-1739> Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key

-----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net<mailto:nigel@channelisles.net>] Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

...

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected better from Mr Chehade' in that department

Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent previous CEOs. Certainly not from Paul. In fact not even from Rod, who despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways was, in many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures!

In China, relationships matter.

Appearance matters. A lot.

Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than the 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the discussion with the relevant actors inside China.

The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' for peccadilloes).

So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't see the problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here.

I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet once again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'. A CEO can never be in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.)

The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his resignation, choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in another revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently completely different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive statements of them and their backers.

Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'.

UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations that operate in the same sphere. Why, in the name of accountabaility, does ICANN still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible optics of Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous.

Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count.

Hardly at all.

It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more than 'what', or even 'why'.

...

' And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

Likewise.

_______________________________________________ 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

_______________________________________________ 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

What is being blown out of proportion here? What did Fadi do? What do those who criticize think was his rationale for doing what he did? In dealing with a country as large as China, it is wise to defer differences and emphasize points on which there are agreements. It requires such an approach to open the door for dialogue, otherwise decades would pass before we see China or Russia eye to eye. There is a reaction, almost as if orchestrated, that seems to magnify something perceived to have been done by Fadi Chehade exceeding his brief, wrongly portrayed as self serving involvement, in complete disregard for every thing that he did during his term in ICANN's best interest. If the rationale is unspoken, is it to be misunderstood, so much so that the Community should forget everything he did for ICANN and harp on the absence of his vocal opposition to parts of the Chinese statement and his willingness to serve a committee, which might in reality turn out to be for the good of the multistakeholder governance? When someone in a highly responsible position comes under such a severe attack, often the cause for attack is not what is apparent. I observed from a distance that he wanted to bring about certain wider changes which would alter the existing order in several ways (other participants in various roles might know better), appeared to enjoy a certain degree of freedom to initiate and execute programs in his own style, for a year or two. He talked about values, he talked about various imbalances, he showed respect for good people in the Board, he reached out to the world by taking the initiative to organize an IGF like multistakeholder event with Government participation which was a successful event, and went on to further this good work by seeking to involve the larger Business Community in the intended follow up as the NetMundial Initiative. He improved participation in GAC, reached out to Russia and China. There is more that he probably wanted to do. It was meaningful leadership. I recollect that, at the At-Large summit in London, he said "It is time for the interests to move out of ICANN, and for the community to come in". Sometime later, in Istanbul, he sought to introduce the concept of ICANN "Townhall" meetings but arrived at the first meeting severely discouraged (or so I thought). It appeared that he was challenged for including certain public iana/accountability comments in staff summary. Shortly afterwards, he was challenged in his initiative to appoint External Advisors on ICANN Accountability, was criticized on the process he was to adopt, and the process went through some changes as a result; he was challenged in many other ways whilst performing his role to its fullest actualization. The highest of the orchestrated opposition was to the progress of NetMundial. All these, for different reasons, threatened an existing order. Any reform that has been brought about (by the Board and Fadi's team together) is not even close to being even half done, because and only because, the pressure against change must have been overwhelming. Must have been severely stressful. A case of a CEO not empowered enough to survive an overwhelmingly powerful community. Sivasubramanian M On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Carlos Raul Gutierrez <crg@isoc-cr.org> wrote:

Thank you Milton!

Very good article from my perspective, but still it is difficult to define how and at what level it is best to engage with your main (internet) equipment supplier.....

Have a nice "rutsch" into the new year.

Carlos

On Dec 30, 2015 5:49 AM, "Mueller, Milton L" <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:

...

Here’s my view of ICANN and Fadi’s support for the Chinese Wuzhen Internet Conference. (Spoiler: it’s not about Fadi)

http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/12/29/the-chinese-netmundial-initiati...

From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Raul Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 10:35 AM To: Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> Cc: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

@Roelof +1 on the last comment. Having somebody as bright as Fadi but choking his efforts to follow up on the IMHO GREAT results of the Net Mundial meeting in Brazil, has been the main explanation to me on why he is leaving.

For those critical of his entrepreneurship they may consider NOT hiring private sector CEOs in the future, but "secretary general" type of management that just follow up orders.

Happy holidays

Carlos Raul

On Dec 28, 2015 9:05 AM, "Roelof Meijer" <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> wrote:

Might be the reason why someone like Fadi is actually NOT working for you...

And no, I do not agree at all that this is a "great example of lack of accountability"

Best,

Roelof Meijer

On 26-12-15 13:19, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net> wrote:

...

Paul

If Fadi worked for me, then his leaving date would just have been brought forward dramatically, and he would have, as we say in the UK, found a number of pressing reasons to spend more time with the family.

But the Board don't collectively have the cojones to do that.

That's not really a criticism of the institution or the current members of it, just a recognition of how much power that the Board of non-profits (don't) have over their General Manager (as I saw over 20 years ago as a board member of the Radio Society of Great Britain, which despite being an office I could trace back in history to a certain Sr. Marconi, had exactly the same level of power(lessness) than the ICANN Board has, in some aspects).

Indeed, were I an ICANN Board member I might take that view -- in that the damage to the organisation from further inflaming the situation might be greater than just crossing my fingers and waiting for the problem to go away naturally in the Spring.

However, it's a great example of lack of accountability, wouldn't you agree?

On 25/12/15 15:33, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:

...

We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come from, any public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi is) who did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal. While acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity -- none at all. At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so stringent that it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable test) so clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role with the private role was virtually non-existent.

For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this story:

...

...

...

...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the-rev ena

...

...

...

...

nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c5-1 1e5 -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html. A minor Federal official wrote "The Revenant" before he joined the government. Now, the book is a major movie just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. In the normal course of events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be doing publicity for the film. Here, the author cannot -- because he is a Deputy Trade Representative of the US. Now, I don't know about you, but for me the likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the USTR office and draw an inference of official US government approval is vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a place where the officials private life could diverge from his public responsibility. But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for his movie.

As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is clearly much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his new "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN -- which is of course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted. Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably tone deaf.

I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your public position works both ways. We worry not only about the new "private" connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that the official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to benefit his future private actions rather than the public interest. It isn't the connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) -- it is the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made while the public official was still working for the public that raises the questions.

Paul

Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key

-----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

...

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected better from Mr Chehade' in that department

Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent previous CEOs. Certainly not from Paul. In fact not even from Rod, who despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways was, in many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures!

In China, relationships matter.

Appearance matters. A lot.

Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than the 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the discussion with the relevant actors inside China.

The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' for peccadilloes).

So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't see the problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here.

I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet once again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'. A CEO can never be in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.)

The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his resignation, choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in another revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently completely different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive statements of them and their backers.

Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'.

UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations that operate in the same sphere. Why, in the name of accountabaility, does ICANN still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible optics of Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous.

Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count.

Hardly at all.

It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more than 'what', or even 'why'.

...

' And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

Likewise.

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

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

-- Sivasubramanian M

+1 CW On 31 Dec 2015, at 11:26, Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> wrote:

And that, in my opinion, would be the perfect final say on this issue.

Thanks, Sivasubramanian

Roelof Meijer

On 30-12-15 18:11, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Sivasubramanian M" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of isolatedn@gmail.com> wrote:

...

What is being blown out of proportion here? What did Fadi do? What do those who criticize think was his rationale for doing what he did?

In dealing with a country as large as China, it is wise to defer differences and emphasize points on which there are agreements. It requires such an approach to open the door for dialogue, otherwise decades would pass before we see China or Russia eye to eye.

There is a reaction, almost as if orchestrated, that seems to magnify something perceived to have been done by Fadi Chehade exceeding his brief, wrongly portrayed as self serving involvement, in complete disregard for every thing that he did during his term in ICANN's best interest. If the rationale is unspoken, is it to be misunderstood, so much so that the Community should forget everything he did for ICANN and harp on the absence of his vocal opposition to parts of the Chinese statement and his willingness to serve a committee, which might in reality turn out to be for the good of the multistakeholder governance?

When someone in a highly responsible position comes under such a severe attack, often the cause for attack is not what is apparent.

I observed from a distance that he wanted to bring about certain wider changes which would alter the existing order in several ways (other participants in various roles might know better), appeared to enjoy a certain degree of freedom to initiate and execute programs in his own style, for a year or two. He talked about values, he talked about various imbalances, he showed respect for good people in the Board, he reached out to the world by taking the initiative to organize an IGF like multistakeholder event with Government participation which was a successful event, and went on to further this good work by seeking to involve the larger Business Community in the intended follow up as the NetMundial Initiative. He improved participation in GAC, reached out to Russia and China. There is more that he probably wanted to do. It was meaningful leadership.

I recollect that, at the At-Large summit in London, he said "It is time for the interests to move out of ICANN, and for the community to come in". Sometime later, in Istanbul, he sought to introduce the concept of ICANN "Townhall" meetings but arrived at the first meeting severely discouraged (or so I thought). It appeared that he was challenged for including certain public iana/accountability comments in staff summary. Shortly afterwards, he was challenged in his initiative to appoint External Advisors on ICANN Accountability, was criticized on the process he was to adopt, and the process went through some changes as a result; he was challenged in many other ways whilst performing his role to its fullest actualization. The highest of the orchestrated opposition was to the progress of NetMundial.

All these, for different reasons, threatened an existing order. Any reform that has been brought about (by the Board and Fadi's team together) is not even close to being even half done, because and only because, the pressure against change must have been overwhelming.

Must have been severely stressful. A case of a CEO not empowered enough to survive an overwhelmingly powerful community.

Sivasubramanian M

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Carlos Raul Gutierrez <crg@isoc-cr.org> wrote:

...

Thank you Milton!

Very good article from my perspective, but still it is difficult to define how and at what level it is best to engage with your main (internet) equipment supplier.....

Have a nice "rutsch" into the new year.

Carlos

On Dec 30, 2015 5:49 AM, "Mueller, Milton L" <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:

...

Here¹s my view of ICANN and Fadi¹s support for the Chinese Wuzhen Internet Conference. (Spoiler: it¹s not about Fadi)

http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/12/29/the-chinese-netmundial-init iative/

From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Raul Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 10:35 AM To: Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> Cc: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

@Roelof +1 on the last comment. Having somebody as bright as Fadi but choking his efforts to follow up on the IMHO GREAT results of the Net Mundial meeting in Brazil, has been the main explanation to me on why he is leaving.

For those critical of his entrepreneurship they may consider NOT hiring private sector CEOs in the future, but "secretary general" type of management that just follow up orders.

Happy holidays

Carlos Raul

On Dec 28, 2015 9:05 AM, "Roelof Meijer" <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> wrote:

Might be the reason why someone like Fadi is actually NOT working for you...

And no, I do not agree at all that this is a "great example of lack of accountability"

Best,

Roelof Meijer

On 26-12-15 13:19, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net> wrote:

...

Paul

If Fadi worked for me, then his leaving date would just have been brought forward dramatically, and he would have, as we say in the UK, found a number of pressing reasons to spend more time with the family.

But the Board don't collectively have the cojones to do that.

That's not really a criticism of the institution or the current members of it, just a recognition of how much power that the Board of non-profits (don't) have over their General Manager (as I saw over 20 years ago as a board member of the Radio Society of Great Britain, which despite being an office I could trace back in history to a certain Sr. Marconi, had exactly the same level of power(lessness) than the ICANN Board has, in some aspects).

Indeed, were I an ICANN Board member I might take that view -- in that the damage to the organisation from further inflaming the situation might be greater than just crossing my fingers and waiting for the problem to go away naturally in the Spring.

However, it's a great example of lack of accountability, wouldn't you agree?

On 25/12/15 15:33, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:

...

We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come from, any public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi is) who did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal. While acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity -- none at all. At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so stringent that it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable test) so clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role with the private role was virtually non-existent.

For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this story:

...

...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the- rev ena

...

...

nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c 5-1 1e5 -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html. A minor Federal official wrote "The Revenant" before he joined the government. Now, the book is a major movie just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. In the normal

course

...

of events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be doing publicity for the film. Here, the author cannot -- because he is a Deputy Trade Representative of the US. Now, I don't know about you, but for me the likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the USTR office and draw an inference of official US government approval is vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a place where the officials private life could diverge from his public responsibility. But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for his movie.

As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is clearly much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his new "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN -- which is of course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted. Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably tone deaf.

I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your public position works both ways. We worry not only about the new "private" connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that the official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to benefit his future private actions rather than the public interest. It isn't the connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) -- it is the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made while the public official was still working for the public that raises the questions.

Paul

Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key

-----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

> Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have > never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over. > > avri

This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected better from Mr Chehade' in that department

Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent previous CEOs. Certainly not from Paul. In fact not even from Rod, who despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways was, in many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures!

In China, relationships matter.

Appearance matters. A lot.

Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than the 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the discussion with the relevant actors inside China.

The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' for peccadilloes).

So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't see the problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here.

I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet once again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'. A CEO can never be in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.)

The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his resignation, choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in another revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently completely different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive statements of them and their backers.

Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'.

UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations that operate in the same sphere. Why, in the name of accountabaility, does ICANN still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible optics of Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous.

Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count.

Hardly at all.

It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more than 'what', or even 'why'.

> ' > And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays! >

Likewise.

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

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

-- Sivasubramanian M _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

Can you please explain the significance and context to us lesser mortals? el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini

On 1 Jan 2016, at 22:35, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang <wolfgang.kleinwaechter@medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:

FYI

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-gosset/digital-china-and-its-imp_b_88543...

Wolfgang

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org im Auftrag von Christopher Wilkinson Gesendet: Do 31.12.2015 20:54 An: Accountability Cross Community Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

+1 CW

...

On 31 Dec 2015, at 11:26, Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> wrote:

And that, in my opinion, would be the perfect final say on this issue.

Thanks, Sivasubramanian

Roelof Meijer

On 30-12-15 18:11, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Sivasubramanian M" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of isolatedn@gmail.com> wrote:

...

What is being blown out of proportion here? What did Fadi do? What do those who criticize think was his rationale for doing what he did?

In dealing with a country as large as China, it is wise to defer differences and emphasize points on which there are agreements. It requires such an approach to open the door for dialogue, otherwise decades would pass before we see China or Russia eye to eye.

There is a reaction, almost as if orchestrated, that seems to magnify something perceived to have been done by Fadi Chehade exceeding his brief, wrongly portrayed as self serving involvement, in complete disregard for every thing that he did during his term in ICANN's best interest. If the rationale is unspoken, is it to be misunderstood, so much so that the Community should forget everything he did for ICANN and harp on the absence of his vocal opposition to parts of the Chinese statement and his willingness to serve a committee, which might in reality turn out to be for the good of the multistakeholder governance?

When someone in a highly responsible position comes under such a severe attack, often the cause for attack is not what is apparent.

I observed from a distance that he wanted to bring about certain wider changes which would alter the existing order in several ways (other participants in various roles might know better), appeared to enjoy a certain degree of freedom to initiate and execute programs in his own style, for a year or two. He talked about values, he talked about various imbalances, he showed respect for good people in the Board, he reached out to the world by taking the initiative to organize an IGF like multistakeholder event with Government participation which was a successful event, and went on to further this good work by seeking to involve the larger Business Community in the intended follow up as the NetMundial Initiative. He improved participation in GAC, reached out to Russia and China. There is more that he probably wanted to do. It was meaningful leadership.

I recollect that, at the At-Large summit in London, he said "It is time for the interests to move out of ICANN, and for the community to come in". Sometime later, in Istanbul, he sought to introduce the concept of ICANN "Townhall" meetings but arrived at the first meeting severely discouraged (or so I thought). It appeared that he was challenged for including certain public iana/accountability comments in staff summary. Shortly afterwards, he was challenged in his initiative to appoint External Advisors on ICANN Accountability, was criticized on the process he was to adopt, and the process went through some changes as a result; he was challenged in many other ways whilst performing his role to its fullest actualization. The highest of the orchestrated opposition was to the progress of NetMundial.

All these, for different reasons, threatened an existing order. Any reform that has been brought about (by the Board and Fadi's team together) is not even close to being even half done, because and only because, the pressure against change must have been overwhelming.

Must have been severely stressful. A case of a CEO not empowered enough to survive an overwhelmingly powerful community.

Sivasubramanian M

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Carlos Raul Gutierrez <crg@isoc-cr.org> wrote:

...

Thank you Milton!

Very good article from my perspective, but still it is difficult to define how and at what level it is best to engage with your main (internet) equipment supplier.....

Have a nice "rutsch" into the new year.

Carlos

...

On Dec 30, 2015 5:49 AM, "Mueller, Milton L" <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:

Here¹s my view of ICANN and Fadi¹s support for the Chinese Wuzhen Internet Conference. (Spoiler: it¹s not about Fadi)

http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/12/29/the-chinese-netmundial-init iative/

From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Raul Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 10:35 AM To: Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> Cc: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

@Roelof +1 on the last comment. Having somebody as bright as Fadi but choking his efforts to follow up on the IMHO GREAT results of the Net Mundial meeting in Brazil, has been the main explanation to me on why he is leaving.

For those critical of his entrepreneurship they may consider NOT hiring private sector CEOs in the future, but "secretary general" type of management that just follow up orders.

Happy holidays

Carlos Raul

On Dec 28, 2015 9:05 AM, "Roelof Meijer" <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> wrote:

Might be the reason why someone like Fadi is actually NOT working for you...

And no, I do not agree at all that this is a "great example of lack of accountability"

Best,

Roelof Meijer

On 26-12-15 13:19, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org

...

on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net> wrote:

Paul

If Fadi worked for me, then his leaving date would just have been brought forward dramatically, and he would have, as we say in the UK, found a number of pressing reasons to spend more time with the family.

But the Board don't collectively have the cojones to do that.

That's not really a criticism of the institution or the current members of it, just a recognition of how much power that the Board of non-profits (don't) have over their General Manager (as I saw over 20 years ago as a board member of the Radio Society of Great Britain, which despite being an office I could trace back in history to a certain Sr. Marconi, had exactly the same level of power(lessness) than the ICANN Board has, in some aspects).

Indeed, were I an ICANN Board member I might take that view -- in that the damage to the organisation from further inflaming the situation might be greater than just crossing my fingers and waiting for the problem to go away naturally in the Spring.

However, it's a great example of lack of accountability, wouldn't you agree?

> On 25/12/15 15:33, Paul Rosenzweig wrote: > We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come from, > any > public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi is) > who > did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal. While > acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity -- none > at > all. At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so stringent > that > it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable test) so > clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role with > the > private role was virtually non-existent. > > For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this story:

...

> > https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the- > rev > ena

...

> > nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c > 5-1 > 1e5 > -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html. A minor Federal official wrote "The > Revenant" before he joined the government. Now, the book is a major > movie > just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. In the normal course > of > events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be > doing > publicity for the film. Here, the author cannot -- because he is a > Deputy > Trade Representative of the US. Now, I don't know about you, but for > me the > likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the USTR > office and draw an inference of official US government approval is > vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a place > where > the officials private life could diverge from his public > responsibility. > But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of > impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for his > movie. > > As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is > clearly > much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his new > "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN -- which > is of > course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted. > Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably > tone > deaf. > > I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your > public > position works both ways. We worry not only about the new "private" > connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that the > official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to > benefit > his future private actions rather than the public interest. It isn't > the > connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) -- it > is > the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made > while > the public official was still working for the public that raises the > questions. > > Paul > > Paul Rosenzweig > paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com > O: +1 (202) 547-0660 > M: +1 (202) 329-9650 > VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 > Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 > Link to my PGP Key > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] > Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM > To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in > China > > >> Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have >> never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue > over. >> >> avri > > This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural > judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected > better > from Mr Chehade' in that department > > Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent > previous CEOs. Certainly not from Paul. In fact not even from Rod, > who > despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways > was, in > many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures! > > In China, relationships matter. > > Appearance matters. A lot. > > Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than > the > 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the > discussion with the relevant actors inside China. > > The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a > cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' > for peccadilloes). > > So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't > see the > problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here. > > I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I > personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet > once > again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'. A CEO can never > be > in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. > (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. > Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.) > > The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his > resignation, > choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in another > revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently > completely > different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive statements of > them > and their backers. > > Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'. > > UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations > that > operate in the same sphere. Why, in the name of accountabaility, does > ICANN > still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible > optics of > Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous. > > Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count. > > Hardly at all. > > It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more > than > 'what', or even 'why'. > > >> ' >> And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays! > > > Likewise. > > > _______________________________________________ > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list > 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

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

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

-- Sivasubramanian M _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

Happy new Year Wolfgang! You lost me little here

The work of the CCWG-ACCT could write Internet history if the group would be able to agree on an enhanced system of power sharing both on PDP and decision making within ICANN. This could become an important step forward to add concrete procedures to the still vague defined concept of "multistakeholderism" and pave the way for an enhanced understanding of "shared responsibilities" and "shared sovereignty in the information age.

enhanced system of power sharing on …PDP???? Do you mean the GNSO PDP? Like keeping a permanent GNSO liaison to the GAC, like the GNSO commenting the GAC communiques to the Board, and to formally involving GAC much earlier in the PDP process????? What else could the PDP do to share power? Carlos Raul

Wolfgang

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org im Auftrag von Dr Eberhard W Lisse Gesendet: Fr 01.01.2016 22:02 An: CCWG Accountability Cc: Lisse Eberhard Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

Can you please explain the significance and context to us lesser mortals?

el

-- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini

...

On 1 Jan 2016, at 22:35, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang <wolfgang.kleinwaechter@medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:

FYI

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-gosset/digital-china-and-its-imp_b_88543...

Wolfgang

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org im Auftrag von Christopher Wilkinson Gesendet: Do 31.12.2015 20:54 An: Accountability Cross Community Betreff: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

+1 CW

...

On 31 Dec 2015, at 11:26, Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> wrote:

And that, in my opinion, would be the perfect final say on this issue.

Thanks, Sivasubramanian

Roelof Meijer

On 30-12-15 18:11, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Sivasubramanian M" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of isolatedn@gmail.com> wrote:

...

What is being blown out of proportion here? What did Fadi do? What do those who criticize think was his rationale for doing what he did?

In dealing with a country as large as China, it is wise to defer differences and emphasize points on which there are agreements. It requires such an approach to open the door for dialogue, otherwise decades would pass before we see China or Russia eye to eye.

There is a reaction, almost as if orchestrated, that seems to magnify something perceived to have been done by Fadi Chehade exceeding his brief, wrongly portrayed as self serving involvement, in complete disregard for every thing that he did during his term in ICANN's best interest. If the rationale is unspoken, is it to be misunderstood, so much so that the Community should forget everything he did for ICANN and harp on the absence of his vocal opposition to parts of the Chinese statement and his willingness to serve a committee, which might in reality turn out to be for the good of the multistakeholder governance?

When someone in a highly responsible position comes under such a severe attack, often the cause for attack is not what is apparent.

I observed from a distance that he wanted to bring about certain wider changes which would alter the existing order in several ways (other participants in various roles might know better), appeared to enjoy a certain degree of freedom to initiate and execute programs in his own style, for a year or two. He talked about values, he talked about various imbalances, he showed respect for good people in the Board, he reached out to the world by taking the initiative to organize an IGF like multistakeholder event with Government participation which was a successful event, and went on to further this good work by seeking to involve the larger Business Community in the intended follow up as the NetMundial Initiative. He improved participation in GAC, reached out to Russia and China. There is more that he probably wanted to do. It was meaningful leadership.

I recollect that, at the At-Large summit in London, he said "It is time for the interests to move out of ICANN, and for the community to come in". Sometime later, in Istanbul, he sought to introduce the concept of ICANN "Townhall" meetings but arrived at the first meeting severely discouraged (or so I thought). It appeared that he was challenged for including certain public iana/accountability comments in staff summary. Shortly afterwards, he was challenged in his initiative to appoint External Advisors on ICANN Accountability, was criticized on the process he was to adopt, and the process went through some changes as a result; he was challenged in many other ways whilst performing his role to its fullest actualization. The highest of the orchestrated opposition was to the progress of NetMundial.

All these, for different reasons, threatened an existing order. Any reform that has been brought about (by the Board and Fadi's team together) is not even close to being even half done, because and only because, the pressure against change must have been overwhelming.

Must have been severely stressful. A case of a CEO not empowered enough to survive an overwhelmingly powerful community.

Sivasubramanian M

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Carlos Raul Gutierrez <crg@isoc-cr.org> wrote:

...

Thank you Milton!

Very good article from my perspective, but still it is difficult to define how and at what level it is best to engage with your main (internet) equipment supplier.....

Have a nice "rutsch" into the new year.

Carlos

...

On Dec 30, 2015 5:49 AM, "Mueller, Milton L" <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:

Here¹s my view of ICANN and Fadi¹s support for the Chinese Wuzhen Internet Conference. (Spoiler: it¹s not about Fadi)

http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/12/29/the-chinese-netmundial-init iative/

From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Raul Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 10:35 AM To: Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> Cc: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

@Roelof +1 on the last comment. Having somebody as bright as Fadi but choking his efforts to follow up on the IMHO GREAT results of the Net Mundial meeting in Brazil, has been the main explanation to me on why he is leaving.

For those critical of his entrepreneurship they may consider NOT hiring private sector CEOs in the future, but "secretary general" type of management that just follow up orders.

Happy holidays

Carlos Raul

On Dec 28, 2015 9:05 AM, "Roelof Meijer" <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> wrote:

Might be the reason why someone like Fadi is actually NOT working for you...

And no, I do not agree at all that this is a "great example of lack of accountability"

Best,

Roelof Meijer

On 26-12-15 13:19, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org > on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net> wrote: > > Paul > > If Fadi worked for me, then his leaving date would just have been > brought forward dramatically, and he would have, as we say in the UK, > found a number of pressing reasons to spend more time with the family. > > But the Board don't collectively have the cojones to do that. > > That's not really a criticism of the institution or the current members > of it, just a recognition of how much power that the Board of > non-profits (don't) have over their General Manager (as I saw over 20 > years ago as a board member of the Radio Society of Great Britain, which > despite being an office I could trace back in history to a certain Sr. > Marconi, had exactly the same level of power(lessness) than the ICANN > Board has, in some aspects). > > Indeed, were I an ICANN Board member I might take that view -- in that > the damage to the organisation from further inflaming the situation > might be greater than just crossing my fingers and waiting for the > problem to go away naturally in the Spring. > > However, it's a great example of lack of accountability, wouldn't you > agree? > > > >> On 25/12/15 15:33, Paul Rosenzweig wrote: >> We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come from, >> any >> public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi is) >> who >> did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal. While >> acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity -- none >> at >> all. At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so stringent >> that >> it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable test) so >> clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role with >> the >> private role was virtually non-existent. >> >> For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this story:

>> >> https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the- >> rev >> ena

>> >> nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c >> 5-1 >> 1e5 >> -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html. A minor Federal official wrote "The >> Revenant" before he joined the government. Now, the book is a major >> movie >> just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. In the normal course >> of >> events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be >> doing >> publicity for the film. Here, the author cannot -- because he is a >> Deputy >> Trade Representative of the US. Now, I don't know about you, but for >> me the >> likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the USTR >> office and draw an inference of official US government approval is >> vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a place >> where >> the officials private life could diverge from his public >> responsibility. >> But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of >> impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for his >> movie. >> >> As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is >> clearly >> much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his new >> "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN -- which >> is of >> course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted. >> Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably >> tone >> deaf. >> >> I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your >> public >> position works both ways. We worry not only about the new "private" >> connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that the >> official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to >> benefit >> his future private actions rather than the public interest. It isn't >> the >> connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) -- it >> is >> the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made >> while >> the public official was still working for the public that raises the >> questions. >> >> Paul >> >> Paul Rosenzweig >> paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com >> O: +1 (202) 547-0660 >> M: +1 (202) 329-9650 >> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 >> Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 >> Link to my PGP Key >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] >> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM >> To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org >> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in >> China >> >> >>> Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have >>> never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue >> over. >>> >>> avri >> >> This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural >> judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected >> better >> from Mr Chehade' in that department >> >> Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent >> previous CEOs. Certainly not from Paul. In fact not even from Rod, >> who >> despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways >> was, in >> many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures! >> >> In China, relationships matter. >> >> Appearance matters. A lot. >> >> Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than >> the >> 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the >> discussion with the relevant actors inside China. >> >> The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a >> cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' >> for peccadilloes). >> >> So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't >> see the >> problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here. >> >> I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I >> personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet >> once >> again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'. A CEO can never >> be >> in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. >> (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. >> Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.) >> >> The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his >> resignation, >> choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in another >> revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently >> completely >> different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive statements of >> them >> and their backers. >> >> Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'. >> >> UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations >> that >> operate in the same sphere. Why, in the name of accountabaility, does >> ICANN >> still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible >> optics of >> Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous. >> >> Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count. >> >> Hardly at all. >> >> It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more >> than >> 'what', or even 'why'. >> >> >>> ' >>> And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays! >> >> >> Likewise. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list >> 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

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

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

-- Sivasubramanian M _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

---

Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

Very good article from my perspective, but still it is difficult to define how and at what level it is best to engage with your main (internet) equipment supplier..... MM: No, it’s not difficult at all. Engage with your equipment suppliers (and China is not actually the dominant one yet) as a trading partner, and perhaps as a co-investor on either side of the market. One can have bilateral, multilateral and private sector discussions with equipment suppliers and the Chinese government about trade issues and policy issues in a variety of forums. The Chinese are active in IEEE, in industry standards bodies such as 3GPP, in ITU, etc. They are active in ICANN, IETF, RIRs, too. There is no lack of opportunities to engage. No need to join advisory committees for state-run conferences promoting an IG agenda that is nationalistic.

hmmm! On 31-Dec-15 05:46, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:

Dear All, I have now realised that internet community/ ICANN community is a very strange and peculiar community. Kavouss

--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

hmmm == what a curious thing to say, this is something I need to think about. at least that is what I always mean by it. and with that, best wishes to all my very strange and peculiar Internet community compatriots. hope that those of you who already reached 2016 are setting the stage for a fascinating year. avri On 31-Dec-15 12:27, Sivasubramanian M wrote:

Dear Avri,

Please translate :)

Hmm. I use it more in chat to mean "I completely disagree with what you've just said". – user24964 Nov 18 '13 at 16:49 <http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/138172/can-someone-explain-hmmm#c...>

3

It means exactly the same thing as when someone actually says it when you're speaking face to face. In other words it can mean a lot if different things depending on context and intonation (which admittedly is lost in email and chat) – Jim <http://english.stackexchange.com/users/17956/jim> Nov 18 '13 at 16:52 <http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/138172/can-someone-explain-hmmm#c...>

@J.R.- I say it on several occasions. 1. When I want to say "I'm not sure I agree with you, but I don't think it's worth arguing about." 2. when I'm not paying strict attention to the person who's speaking and I realize they've just addressed a question to me and I want to indicate that I need them to repeat it. 3. when I'm in the middle of doing something and I just realize that I've run into a problem to which I don't immediately know the solution. – Jim <http://english.stackexchange.com/users/17956/jim> Nov 18 '13 at 16:59 <http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/138172/can-someone-explain-hmmm#c...>

4

Hmmmm... no additional context? It could be used to express annoyance, but it could be used to express other sentiments as well, such as "I hadn't thought of it that way before" or "let me think about this some more for a moment" or "I'm not so sure I agree with that." More here <http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/hmm>. – J.R. <http://english.stackexchange.com/users/18220/j-r> Nov 18 '13 at 17:02 <http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/138172/can-someone-explain-hmmm#c...>

Ah yes, the "I hadn't thought of that before" usage. Good – Jim <http://english.stackexchange.com/users/17956/jim> Nov 18 '13 at 17:03 <http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/138172/can-someone-explain-hmmm#c...>

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 7:44 PM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org <mailto:avri@acm.org>> wrote:

hmmm!

On 31-Dec-15 05:46, Kavouss Arasteh wrote: > Dear All, > I have now realised that internet community/ ICANN community is a very > strange and peculiar community. > Kavouss

--- 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

-- Sivasubramanian M <https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy>

--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Milton, I was in Wuzhen, and participated in the conference, including a 2 ½ hour panel discussion with Bob Kahn and others. Although we may disagree more than agree in general, I thank you very much for an adult, articulate and intelligent discussion of the fundamental issue of whether it is better to work with progressive factions of repressive regimes or to decide that it is not the right thing to do, for a number of reasons. My conclusion differs from yours. I've worked in about 50 developing countries over the last 40 years, and in general one can make a difference, possibly a substantial difference, in working with those progressive factions. But that is my opinion, and I realize that it is not universally shared. I say the above as a general comment, not related to the specifics of Fadi's involvement in China. However, I am disturbed at the number of responses to this incident, based upon bias, distortion, and lack of fact or context, that have been gratuitously offered on this list. The echo chamber has been very effective. I thank Siva and Roelof for past comments (not repeated below) that in my view reflect an thoughtful and proper perspective of the incident. George

On Dec 30, 2015, at 6:49 AM, Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu> wrote:

Here’s my view of ICANN and Fadi’s support for the Chinese Wuzhen Internet Conference. (Spoiler: it’s not about Fadi) http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/12/29/the-chinese-netmundial-initiati... <http://www.internetgovernance.org/2015/12/29/the-chinese-netmundial-initiati...>   <> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Raul Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 10:35 AM To: Roelof Meijer <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> Cc: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

@Roelof +1 on the last comment. Having somebody as bright as Fadi but choking his efforts to follow up on the IMHO GREAT results of the Net Mundial meeting in Brazil, has been the main explanation to me on why he is leaving.

For those critical of his entrepreneurship they may consider NOT hiring private sector CEOs in the future, but "secretary general" type of management that just follow up orders.

Happy holidays

Carlos Raul

On Dec 28, 2015 9:05 AM, "Roelof Meijer" <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl <mailto:Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl>> wrote: Might be the reason why someone like Fadi is actually NOT working for you...

And no, I do not agree at all that this is a "great example of lack of accountability"

Best,

Roelof Meijer

On 26-12-15 13 <tel:26-12-15%2013>:19, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Nigel Roberts" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of nigel@channelisles.net <mailto:nigel@channelisles.net>> wrote:

...

Paul

If Fadi worked for me, then his leaving date would just have been brought forward dramatically, and he would have, as we say in the UK, found a number of pressing reasons to spend more time with the family.

But the Board don't collectively have the cojones to do that.

That's not really a criticism of the institution or the current members of it, just a recognition of how much power that the Board of non-profits (don't) have over their General Manager (as I saw over 20 years ago as a board member of the Radio Society of Great Britain, which despite being an office I could trace back in history to a certain Sr. Marconi, had exactly the same level of power(lessness) than the ICANN Board has, in some aspects).

Indeed, were I an ICANN Board member I might take that view -- in that the damage to the organisation from further inflaming the situation might be greater than just crossing my fingers and waiting for the problem to go away naturally in the Spring.

However, it's a great example of lack of accountability, wouldn't you agree?

On 25/12/15 15:33, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:

...

We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come from, any public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi is) who did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal. While acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity -- none at all. At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so stringent that it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable test) so clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role with the private role was virtually non-existent.

For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this story:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the-rev <https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the-rev> ena

nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c5-1 1e5 -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html. A minor Federal official wrote "The Revenant" before he joined the government. Now, the book is a major movie just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. In the normal course of events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be doing publicity for the film. Here, the author cannot -- because he is a Deputy Trade Representative of the US. Now, I don't know about you, but for me the likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the USTR office and draw an inference of official US government approval is vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a place where the officials private life could diverge from his public responsibility. But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for his movie.

As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is clearly much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his new "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN -- which is of course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted. Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably tone deaf.

I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your public position works both ways. We worry not only about the new "private" connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that the official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to benefit his future private actions rather than the public interest. It isn't the connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) -- it is the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made while the public official was still working for the public that raises the questions.

Paul

Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20547-0660> M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20329-9650> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <tel:%2B1%20%28202%29%20738-1739> Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key

-----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net <mailto:nigel@channelisles.net>] Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

...

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected better from Mr Chehade' in that department

Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent previous CEOs. Certainly not from Paul. In fact not even from Rod, who despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways was, in many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures!

In China, relationships matter.

Appearance matters. A lot.

Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than the 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the discussion with the relevant actors inside China.

The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' for peccadilloes).

So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't see the problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here.

I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet once again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'. A CEO can never be in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.)

The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his resignation, choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in another revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently completely different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive statements of them and their backers.

Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'.

UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations that operate in the same sphere. Why, in the name of accountabaility, does ICANN still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible optics of Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous.

Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count.

Hardly at all.

It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more than 'what', or even 'why'.

...

' And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

Likewise.=

Depends on the regime. Xi is not Mao, so all can make their own judgment‎ on the current Chinese regime. But, as Prof. Mueller has written, WIC is undeniably a ‎CCP project to challenge the prevailing MS IG model established by US and other liberal democracies. By passively accepting the "incident" ICANN's Board has implicitly associated the organization with WIC. This is not some post-departure personal engagement by the CEO. Who thinks he would be Co-Chair if he was not the CEO and supplied WIC with a certain degree of cover? And the Advisory Committee has already met. Maybe associating ICANN with a CCP multilateral project before US Congress has removed the freeze on the IANA transition not the best idea? On other hand, not having transition completed might be viewed as a positive development by CCP. ‎ The Chinese play Go, not Chess. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW. Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/Cell Twitter: @VLawDC "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey Original Message From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse Sent: Saturday, January 2, 2016 9:04 AM Cc: Lisse Eberhard; Accountability Cross Community Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China That is not the issue. The issue is whether an outgoing CEO can, on the corporation dime, fly there and add to his post ICANN portfolio ("personal capacity"). Or did the Board instruct him to do this? However, as someone not only having been working a in a few developing countries, but also having been living in one, since while it still was repressive, I feel I can contribute to the perspective: Appeasing repressive regimes has been historically more often wrong than not. And, whether "working with" "progressive factions" makes a "difference", depends on what the word "difference" means. el On 2016-01-02 18:57 , George Sadowsky wrote:

Milton,

I was in Wuzhen, and participated in the conference, including a 2 ½ hour panel discussion with Bob Kahn and others.

Although we may disagree more than agree in general, I thank you very much for an adult, articulate and intelligent discussion of the fundamental issue of whether it is better to work with progressive factions of repressive regimes or to decide that it is not the right thing to do, for a number of reasons.

My conclusion differs from yours. I've worked in about 50 developing countries over the last 40 years, and in general one can make a difference, possibly a substantial difference, in working with those progressive factions. But that is my opinion, and I realize that it is not universally shared.

I say the above as a general comment, not related to the specifics of Fadi's involvement in China. However, I am disturbed at the number of responses to this incident, based upon bias, distortion, and lack of fact or context, that have been gratuitously offered on this list. The echo chamber has been very effective.

I thank Siva and Roelof for past comments (not repeated below) that in my view reflect an thoughtful and proper perspective of the incident.

George

I am getting rather worried about what some (unwanted) the implications of empowering the community through the CCWG proposals might actually be, if I (try to) follow the reasoning of Phil and Paul. There seems to be so much time in the community to ³chase every rabbit² on the basis of all kinds of assumptions Like Avri, I fail to understand the crisis over this. And I agree with Tijani when he says: "Fadi Chehadé would never accept anything that leads to an intergovernmental Internet Governance; at the contrary, I think it is a way to reinforce the MSM in the advisory committee, and in the World Internet Conference². When making assumptions, let¹s at least take one¹s track record into consideration. Cheers, Roelof On 25-12-15 16:33, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Paul Rosenzweig" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:

We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come from, any public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi is) who did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal. While acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity -- none at all. At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so stringent that it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable test) so clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role with the private role was virtually non-existent.

For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this story: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the-reve na nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c5-11 e5 -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html. A minor Federal official wrote "The Revenant" before he joined the government. Now, the book is a major movie just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. In the normal course of events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be doing publicity for the film. Here, the author cannot -- because he is a Deputy Trade Representative of the US. Now, I don't know about you, but for me the likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the USTR office and draw an inference of official US government approval is vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a place where the officials private life could diverge from his public responsibility. But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for his movie.

As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is clearly much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his new "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN -- which is of course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted. Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably tone deaf.

I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your public position works both ways. We worry not only about the new "private" connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that the official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to benefit his future private actions rather than the public interest. It isn't the connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) -- it is the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made while the public official was still working for the public that raises the questions.

Paul

Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key

-----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

...

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected better from Mr Chehade' in that department

Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent previous CEOs. Certainly not from Paul. In fact not even from Rod, who despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways was, in many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures!

In China, relationships matter.

Appearance matters. A lot.

Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than the 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the discussion with the relevant actors inside China.

The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' for peccadilloes).

So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't see the problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here.

I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet once again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'. A CEO can never be in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.)

The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his resignation, choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in another revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently completely different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive statements of them and their backers.

Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'.

UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations that operate in the same sphere. Why, in the name of accountabaility, does ICANN still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible optics of Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous.

Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count.

Hardly at all.

It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more than 'what', or even 'why'.

...

' And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

Likewise.

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

In addition, we should be wary of the fact that too much analysis always leads to paralysis. Regards<div id="DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><table style="border-top: 1px solid #aaabb6; margin-top: 10px;"> <tr> <td style="width: 105px; padding-top: 15px;"> <a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig..." target="_blank"><img src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/logo-avast-v1.png" style="width: 90px; height:33px;"/></a> </td> <td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 20px; color: #41424e; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 18px;">This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. <br /><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaig..." target="_blank" style="color: #4453ea;">www.avast.com</a> </td> </tr> </table><a href="#DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1" height="1"></a></div> On 12/28/15, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 28, 2015 4:00 PM, "Roelof Meijer" <Roelof.Meijer@sidn.nl> wrote:

...

I am getting rather worried about what some (unwanted) the implications of empowering the community through the CCWG proposals might actually be, if I (try to) follow the reasoning of Phil and Paul. There seems to be so much time in the community to ³chase every rabbit² on the basis of all kinds of assumptions

SO: You can say that again, post transition there is going to be a lot of bosses within the community. The unfortunate thing is just that they will be acting on behalf of the entire community. I hope that we will have so much time to identify those acts within the community as much as we have committed to identifying every mistake/error (including those far fetched) of the board/staff.

...

Like Avri, I fail to understand the crisis over this. And I agree with Tijani when he says: "Fadi Chehadé would never accept anything that leads to an intergovernmental Internet Governance; at the contrary, I think it is a way to reinforce the MSM in the advisory committee, and in the World Internet Conference². When making assumptions, let¹s at least take one¹s track record into consideration.

SO: In this process, the goal for some is not about building a better ICANN, but about building a breakable ICANN. Even though I don't agree with a number of board's comment on the CCWG latest draft, I can say I have come to understand why they commented the way they did.

Regards

...

Cheers,

Roelof

On 25-12-15 16:33, "accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Paul Rosenzweig" <accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org on behalf of paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> wrote:

...

We must live in a bit of a different world, I think. Where I come from, any public official (and let's not kid ourselves -- that is what Fadi is) who did what Fadi did would be subject to discipline if not removal. While acting in a public role, the official has no private capacity -- none at all. At least in the world I inhabit that prohibition is so stringent that it applies even to actions that would be (under any reasonable test) so clearly distinct that the likelihood of confusing the public role with

the

...

...

private role was virtually non-existent.

For a particularly telling recent example of this, consider this story:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/meet-the-author-of-the-reve

...

na

nt--except-you-cant-because-of-his-federal-job/2015/12/22/32d632fe-a5c5-11

...

e5 -ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html. A minor Federal official wrote "The Revenant" before he joined the government. Now, the book is a major movie just released today, starring Leonardo DiCaprio. In the normal course of events, the writer of the book on which the film was based would be doing publicity for the film. Here, the author cannot -- because he is a Deputy Trade Representative of the US. Now, I don't know about you, but for me the likelihood that people will associate the movie publicity with the USTR office and draw an inference of official US government approval is vanishingly small -- so on the merits I would say that this is a place where the officials private life could diverge from his public responsibility. But as I said, here we are so cautious about even the appearance of impropriety that the author is not doing any public relations for his movie.

As others have pointed out for Fadi the possibility of confusion is clearly much higher -- the press and the public will (and have) linked his new "personal capacity" job to his current status as CEO of ICANN -- which is of course exactly why he was hired and exactly what the Chinese wanted. Frankly, as Nigel said, I find his behavior troubling and remarkably tone deaf.

I should add that the purpose of the restriction on trading on your public position works both ways. We worry not only about the new "private" connection currying favor with public official, we also worry that the official may make decisions in his public capacity that are now to benefit his future private actions rather than the public interest. It isn't the connection and the cooperation that is troubling (as Eric notes) -- it is the promise of future employment with unknown benefits that was made while the public official was still working for the public that raises the questions.

Paul

Paul Rosenzweig paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 Link to my PGP Key

-----Original Message----- From: Nigel Roberts [mailto:nigel@channelisles.net] Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 5:47 AM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Follow-up from the Word Internet Conference in China

...

Are we tending a bit much toward micromanagement of the CEO? I have never been one of his fans, but this seems a bit much to make an issue over.

avri

This is not just a matter of judgment, but a matter of cross-cultural judgment. The CEO gets paid to get this right. And I REALLY expected better from Mr Chehade' in that department

Actually, I would not have expected this kind of behaviour from recent previous CEOs. Certainly not from Paul. In fact not even from Rod, who despite his public persona and irritating Hollywood rockstar ways was, in many was, quite sensitive to non-US cultures!

In China, relationships matter.

Appearance matters. A lot.

Both of those things can be as important, if not more important than the 'letter of the law' as to whose dime he was on when carrying on the discussion with the relevant actors inside China.

The American way (and the British, to a lesser extent) is based on a cliteral interpretation of the rules (with a seasoning of 'wiggle-room' for peccadilloes).

So while it's understandable to hear from some of you that you don't see the problem, some of us really, really see a big issue here.

I'm not going to complain loudly about the ethics side, although I personally find it curious that Fadi was there on ICANN's dime, yet once again making announcements 'in his personal capacity'. A CEO can never be in his personal capacity, in my view until he gets his cardboard box. (It was strange how the reporters describe him as ICANN's CEO, though. Oh yes, that's because he IS. Even yet.)

The issue is that the head of ICANN, voluntarily handed in his resignation, choosing to leave early, before transition was complete, and in another revolving-door shocker joined an organisation with an apparently completely different world view, and chose Wuzhen to make supportive statements of them and their backers.

Once again, 'it's not what they say, its what others hear'.

UK public servants have a purdah period before moving to organisations that operate in the same sphere. Why, in the name of accountabaility, does ICANN still not? (Have we forgotten and already discounted the terrible optics of Dengate-Thrushgate?). A mere xix months would not be onerous.

Please don't dissect Fadi's actual words. They don't count.

Hardly at all.

It's the nature of 'who', 'where', and 'when' that counts much more than 'what', or even 'why'.

...

' And with that, I shall stop and simply add -- Happy Holidays!

Likewise.

_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 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

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

-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/