Presentation from Joint Townhall at ICANN53
Hi all, Attached is the presentation from today¹s Joint Townhall Meeting at ICANN53. Please let me know if you have any questions! Thanks, Hillary -- Hillary Jett Communications Coordinator Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Interested in the IANA Stewardship Transition? LEARN MORE <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability> . STAY UPDATED <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#status> . FOLLOW <https://twitter.com/icann> . ENGAGE <https://www.icann.org/stewardship-accountability#involved> . Mobile: +1 (202) 674-3403 Email: hillary.jett@icann.org
Just looking at page 15 of the presentation. "The ICANN Board represents the executive entity the community may act against, as appropriate" I recognize that this is in the context of the new community powers - but I would like to see a little more positive an broader description of the role of the ICANN Board. Perhaps something more along the lines of: "The entity appointed by the community to oversee the organization on the community's behalf" Ie the Board comes from the community - it is not really an executive branch of the staff. In fact it is a comprised of non-executives apart from the CEO. The board's role is also to hold the staff accountable to deliver on the commitments agreed with the community in the strategic and operating planning process. While the CCWG is looking at additional accountability mechanisms - I think it should also be recognized that the Board itself is one of the existing mechanisms, however imperfect it may be. It is as much tied to the community through its selection process as the AC and SO councils. Regards, Bruce Tonkin
I would like to both support Bruce Tonkin's statement, and ask that also those of us from the community who have experience in how the SOs elect/select their Board members, perhaps consider that we should be thinking about more of the Board being elected -- e.g. a return to 3 per SO, with then a minority appointed. This may also be a step forward toward accountability, as the nature of the Board is more grounded in the communities also responsible for key roles within ICANN, and with deep roots in the various SOs. This still leaves a significant number of Board seats for Nominating Committee appointment, but it strengthensthe ties to accountability from the Stakeholders. This is somewhat a new proposal, but I am surprised it has not surfaced before. Marilyn Cade From: Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 22:40:17 +0000 Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Presentation from Joint Townhall at ICANN53 Just looking at page 15 of the presentation. “The ICANN Board represents the executive entity the community may act against, as appropriate” I recognize that this is in the context of the new community powers – but I would like to see a little more positive an broader description of the role of the ICANN Board. Perhaps something more along the lines of: “The entity appointed by the community to oversee the organization on the community’s behalf” Ie the Board comes from the community – it is not really an executive branch of the staff. In fact it is a comprised of non-executives apart from the CEO. The board’s role is also to hold the staff accountable to deliver on the commitments agreed with the community in the strategic and operating planning process. While the CCWG is looking at additional accountability mechanisms – I think it should also be recognized that the Board itself is one of the existing mechanisms, however imperfect it may be. It is as much tied to the community through its selection process as the AC and SO councils. Regards, Bruce Tonkin _______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
Marilyn I am sorry I do not understand the message. Pls modify the language in a readable and understandable manner Kavouss 2015-06-23 3:15 GMT+02:00 Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com>:
I would like to both support Bruce Tonkin's statement, and ask that also those of us from the community who have experience in how the SOs elect/select their Board members, perhaps consider that we should be thinking about more of the Board being elected -- e.g. a return to 3 per SO, with then a minority appointed. This may also be a step forward toward accountability, as the nature of the Board is more grounded in the communities also responsible for key roles within ICANN, and with deep roots in the various SOs. This still leaves a significant number of Board seats for Nominating Committee appointment, but it strengthens the ties to accountability from the Stakeholders.
This is somewhat a new proposal, but I am surprised it has not surfaced before.
Marilyn Cade
------------------------------ From: Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 22:40:17 +0000 Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Presentation from Joint Townhall at ICANN53
Just looking at page 15 of the presentation.
“The ICANN Board represents the executive entity the community may act against, as appropriate”
I recognize that this is in the context of the new community powers – but I would like to see a little more positive an broader description of the role of the ICANN Board.
Perhaps something more along the lines of:
“The entity appointed by the community to oversee the organization on the community’s behalf”
Ie the Board comes from the community – it is not really an executive branch of the staff. In fact it is a comprised of non-executives apart from the CEO.
The board’s role is also to hold the staff accountable to deliver on the commitments agreed with the community in the strategic and operating planning process.
While the CCWG is looking at additional accountability mechanisms – I think it should also be recognized that the Board itself is one of the existing mechanisms, however imperfect it may be. It is as much tied to the community through its selection process as the AC and SO councils.
Regards,
Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ 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
Thanks Marilyn. I also support Bruce's statement. I think your suggestion has merit, but, in the context of the transition timeline outlined by Fadi this morning, such structural change is probably a Work Stream 2 issue -- one that can be deferred provided we are assured the Board can be compelled to accept those future community consensus recommendations. Best regards, Keith Sent from my iPhone On Jun 22, 2015, at 10:16 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote: I would like to both support Bruce Tonkin's statement, and ask that also those of us from the community who have experience in how the SOs elect/select their Board members, perhaps consider that we should be thinking about more of the Board being elected -- e.g. a return to 3 per SO, with then a minority appointed. This may also be a step forward toward accountability, as the nature of the Board is more grounded in the communities also responsible for key roles within ICANN, and with deep roots in the various SOs. This still leaves a significant number of Board seats for Nominating Committee appointment, but it strengthens the ties to accountability from the Stakeholders. This is somewhat a new proposal, but I am surprised it has not surfaced before. Marilyn Cade ________________________________ From: Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au<mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 22:40:17 +0000 Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Presentation from Joint Townhall at ICANN53 Just looking at page 15 of the presentation. “The ICANN Board represents the executive entity the community may act against, as appropriate” I recognize that this is in the context of the new community powers – but I would like to see a little more positive an broader description of the role of the ICANN Board. Perhaps something more along the lines of: “The entity appointed by the community to oversee the organization on the community’s behalf” Ie the Board comes from the community – it is not really an executive branch of the staff. In fact it is a comprised of non-executives apart from the CEO. The board’s role is also to hold the staff accountable to deliver on the commitments agreed with the community in the strategic and operating planning process. While the CCWG is looking at additional accountability mechanisms – I think it should also be recognized that the Board itself is one of the existing mechanisms, however imperfect it may be. It is as much tied to the community through its selection process as the AC and SO councils. 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 _______________________________________________ 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
Dear Colleagues, Browsing through the legal memos that discussed the role of the Board, I can suggest a statement that better defines the Board's role as such : "The Icann Board represents the executive entity, in charge of managing and directing the affairs of the corporation." Mathieu Le 22/06/2015 23:07, Drazek, Keith a écrit :
Thanks Marilyn. I also support Bruce's statement. I think your suggestion has merit, but, in the context of the transition timeline outlined by Fadi this morning, such structural change is probably a Work Stream 2 issue -- one that can be deferred provided we are assured the Board can be compelled to accept those future community consensus recommendations.
Best regards, Keith
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 22, 2015, at 10:16 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com <mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote:
I would like to both support Bruce Tonkin's statement, and ask that also those of us from the community who have experience in how the SOs elect/select their Board members, perhaps consider that we should be thinking about more of the Board being elected -- e.g. a return to 3 per SO, with then a minority appointed. This may also be a step forward toward accountability, as the nature of the Board is more grounded in the communities also responsible for key roles within ICANN, and with deep roots in the various SOs. This still leaves a significant number of Board seats for Nominating Committee appointment, but it strengthens the ties to accountability from the Stakeholders.
This is somewhat a new proposal, but I am surprised it has not surfaced before.
Marilyn Cade
------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au <mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 22:40:17 +0000 Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Presentation from Joint Townhall at ICANN53
Just looking at page 15 of the presentation.
“The ICANN Board represents the executive entity the community may act against, as appropriate”
I recognize that this is in the context of the new community powers – but I would like to see a little more positive an broader description of the role of the ICANN Board.
Perhaps something more along the lines of:
“The entity appointed by the community to oversee the organization on the community’s behalf”
Ie the Board comes from the community – it is not really an executive branch of the staff. In fact it is a comprised of non-executives apart from the CEO.
The board’s role is also to hold the staff accountable to deliver on the commitments agreed with the community in the strategic and operating planning process.
While the CCWG is looking at additional accountability mechanisms – I think it should also be recognized that the Board itself is one of the existing mechanisms, however imperfect it may be. It is as much tied to the community through its selection process as the AC and SO councils.
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 _______________________________________________ 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 https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06 mathieu.weill@afnic.fr Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 6:34 AM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
Browsing through the legal memos that discussed the role of the Board, I can suggest a statement that better defines the Board's role as such : "The Icann Board represents the executive entity, in charge of managing and directing the affairs of the corporation."
Hi Mathieu, Is there any specific reason why you are avoiding reflecting the fact that the board is populated by the community? Otherwsie i would have thought Bruce's suggested edit would have been adequate. Or something similar to below: "The ICANN Board represents the executive entity selected/elected by the community to be in charge of managing and directing the affairs of the corporation." Regards
Mathieu
Le 22/06/2015 23:07, Drazek, Keith a écrit :
Thanks Marilyn. I also support Bruce's statement. I think your suggestion has merit, but, in the context of the transition timeline outlined by Fadi this morning, such structural change is probably a Work Stream 2 issue -- one that can be deferred provided we are assured the Board can be compelled to accept those future community consensus recommendations.
Best regards, Keith
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 22, 2015, at 10:16 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:
I would like to both support Bruce Tonkin's statement, and ask that also those of us from the community who have experience in how the SOs elect/select their Board members, perhaps consider that we should be thinking about more of the Board being elected -- e.g. a return to 3 per SO, with then a minority appointed. This may also be a step forward toward accountability, as the nature of the Board is more grounded in the communities also responsible for key roles within ICANN, and with deep roots in the various SOs. This still leaves a significant number of Board seats for Nominating Committee appointment, but it strengthens the ties to accountability from the Stakeholders.
This is somewhat a new proposal, but I am surprised it has not surfaced before.
Marilyn Cade
------------------------------ From: Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 22:40:17 +0000 Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Presentation from Joint Townhall at ICANN53
Just looking at page 15 of the presentation.
“The ICANN Board represents the executive entity the community may act against, as appropriate”
I recognize that this is in the context of the new community powers – but I would like to see a little more positive an broader description of the role of the ICANN Board.
Perhaps something more along the lines of:
“The entity appointed by the community to oversee the organization on the community’s behalf”
Ie the Board comes from the community – it is not really an executive branch of the staff. In fact it is a comprised of non-executives apart from the CEO.
The board’s role is also to hold the staff accountable to deliver on the commitments agreed with the community in the strategic and operating planning process.
While the CCWG is looking at additional accountability mechanisms – I think it should also be recognized that the Board itself is one of the existing mechanisms, however imperfect it may be. It is as much tied to the community through its selection process as the AC and SO councils.
Regards,
Bruce Tonkin
_______________________________________________ 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 listAccountability-Cross-Community@icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06mathieu.weill@afnic.fr Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>* The key to understanding is humility - my view !
Hi Seun, I quite like your suggestion, this adds a valuable aspect I had overlooked. Mathieu Le 23/06/2015 06:42, Seun Ojedeji a écrit :
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 6:34 AM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
Browsing through the legal memos that discussed the role of the Board, I can suggest a statement that better defines the Board's role as such : "The Icann Board represents the executive entity, in charge of managing and directing the affairs of the corporation."
Hi Mathieu,
Is there any specific reason why you are avoiding reflecting the fact that the board is populated by the community? Otherwsie i would have thought Bruce's suggested edit would have been adequate. Or something similar to below:
"The ICANN Board represents the executive entity selected/elected by the community to be in charge of managing and directing the affairs of the corporation."
Regards
Mathieu
Le 22/06/2015 23:07, Drazek, Keith a écrit :
Thanks Marilyn. I also support Bruce's statement. I think your suggestion has merit, but, in the context of the transition timeline outlined by Fadi this morning, such structural change is probably a Work Stream 2 issue -- one that can be deferred provided we are assured the Board can be compelled to accept those future community consensus recommendations.
Best regards, Keith
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 22, 2015, at 10:16 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com <mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote:
I would like to both support Bruce Tonkin's statement, and ask that also those of us from the community who have experience in how the SOs elect/select their Board members, perhaps consider that we should be thinking about more of the Board being elected -- e.g. a return to 3 per SO, with then a minority appointed. This may also be a step forward toward accountability, as the nature of the Board is more grounded in the communities also responsible for key roles within ICANN, and with deep roots in the various SOs. This still leaves a significant number of Board seats for Nominating Committee appointment, but it strengthens the ties to accountability from the Stakeholders.
This is somewhat a new proposal, but I am surprised it has not surfaced before.
Marilyn Cade
------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au <mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 22:40:17 +0000 Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Presentation from Joint Townhall at ICANN53
Just looking at page 15 of the presentation.
“The ICANN Board represents the executive entity the community may act against, as appropriate”
I recognize that this is in the context of the new community powers – but I would like to see a little more positive an broader description of the role of the ICANN Board.
Perhaps something more along the lines of:
“The entity appointed by the community to oversee the organization on the community’s behalf”
Ie the Board comes from the community – it is not really an executive branch of the staff. In fact it is a comprised of non-executives apart from the CEO.
The board’s role is also to hold the staff accountable to deliver on the commitments agreed with the community in the strategic and operating planning process.
While the CCWG is looking at additional accountability mechanisms – I think it should also be recognized that the Board itself is one of the existing mechanisms, however imperfect it may be. It is as much tied to the community through its selection process as the AC and SO councils.
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 _______________________________________________ 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
-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél:+33 1 39 30 83 06 <tel:%2B33%201%2039%2030%2083%2006> mathieu.weill@afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************
_______________________________________________ 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
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
/Seun Ojedeji, Federal University Oye-Ekiti web: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng Mobile: +2348035233535 //alt email:<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <mailto:seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>/
The key to understanding is humility - my view !
-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06 mathieu.weill@afnic.fr Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************
Regardless of the accountability mechanisms we are working on, surely the Board's role is (per ICANN's governance guidelines): "oversee management's performance to ensure that ICANN operates in an effective, efficient and ethical manner" and "responsible for overseeing the development of ICANN's short, medium and long-term strategic plans" I note the word "oversee" - I do not believe that a Board's role is to manage the affairs of a corporation. Matthew On 6/23/2015 6:42 AM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 6:34 AM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr>> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
Browsing through the legal memos that discussed the role of the Board, I can suggest a statement that better defines the Board's role as such : "The Icann Board represents the executive entity, in charge of managing and directing the affairs of the corporation."
Hi Mathieu,
Is there any specific reason why you are avoiding reflecting the fact that the board is populated by the community? Otherwsie i would have thought Bruce's suggested edit would have been adequate. Or something similar to below:
"The ICANN Board represents the executive entity selected/elected by the community to be in charge of managing and directing the affairs of the corporation."
Regards
Mathieu
Le 22/06/2015 23:07, Drazek, Keith a écrit :
Thanks Marilyn. I also support Bruce's statement. I think your suggestion has merit, but, in the context of the transition timeline outlined by Fadi this morning, such structural change is probably a Work Stream 2 issue -- one that can be deferred provided we are assured the Board can be compelled to accept those future community consensus recommendations.
Best regards, Keith
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 22, 2015, at 10:16 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com <mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote:
I would like to both support Bruce Tonkin's statement, and ask that also those of us from the community who have experience in how the SOs elect/select their Board members, perhaps consider that we should be thinking about more of the Board being elected -- e.g. a return to 3 per SO, with then a minority appointed. This may also be a step forward toward accountability, as the nature of the Board is more grounded in the communities also responsible for key roles within ICANN, and with deep roots in the various SOs. This still leaves a significant number of Board seats for Nominating Committee appointment, but it strengthens the ties to accountability from the Stakeholders.
This is somewhat a new proposal, but I am surprised it has not surfaced before.
Marilyn Cade
------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au <mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org <mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 22:40:17 +0000 Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Presentation from Joint Townhall at ICANN53
Just looking at page 15 of the presentation.
“The ICANN Board represents the executive entity the community may act against, as appropriate”
I recognize that this is in the context of the new community powers – but I would like to see a little more positive an broader description of the role of the ICANN Board.
Perhaps something more along the lines of:
“The entity appointed by the community to oversee the organization on the community’s behalf”
Ie the Board comes from the community – it is not really an executive branch of the staff. In fact it is a comprised of non-executives apart from the CEO.
The board’s role is also to hold the staff accountable to deliver on the commitments agreed with the community in the strategic and operating planning process.
While the CCWG is looking at additional accountability mechanisms – I think it should also be recognized that the Board itself is one of the existing mechanisms, however imperfect it may be. It is as much tied to the community through its selection process as the AC and SO councils.
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 _______________________________________________ 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
-- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général Tél:+33 1 39 30 83 06 <tel:%2B33%201%2039%2030%2083%2006> mathieu.weill@afnic.fr <mailto:mathieu.weill@afnic.fr> Twitter : @mathieuweill *****************************
_______________________________________________ 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
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
/Seun Ojedeji, Federal University Oye-Ekiti web: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng Mobile: +2348035233535 //alt email:<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng <mailto:seun.ojedeji@fuoye.edu.ng>/
The key to understanding is humility - my view !
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-- Matthew Shears Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) + 44 (0)771 247 2987
participants (8)
-
Bruce Tonkin -
Drazek, Keith -
Hillary Jett -
Kavouss Arasteh -
Marilyn Cade -
Mathieu Weill -
Matthew Shears -
Seun Ojedeji