Thanks Alan,
Still (re) reading the documents (not trying to switch to French as I am not sure about translation).
Good proposal
I agree with the suggestions from both Olivier, Tijani and Timothy.
I would like to add few points in short sentences:
Internet need stability ICANN need agility (I have the impression that Internet and ICANN are mixed in the ccwg document)
Empowered Community vs community (seems that the second is often taken for the first – need to be carefully used in the ccwg text)
P6 #6 Bullet point 3: Want to be sure that diversity will be taken into consideration for ICANN in all it’s dimension and constituent (including the Board).
P14 #2 Who (people) will be « The members of the UA »?
Reco #2
P18 Step 1 last BP « Committees (???) support the petition… » Must be AC/SO?
P18 #76 BP2 Services must include Interpretation for any conf call
Reco #3
P23 #128 & 129
« … additional protection from changes. »
« … More difficult to change. »
We need protection against « Bad Direction » not against changes.
That all regarding the document.
But I would like to restate my deep concerne about
Recall of the entire board (if and when it will happen the power will be in the (already powerful) hand of staff)
Remove of individual BM
Even if with this accountability proposal is presented as a multistakeholder enhancement, ICANN as a multistakeholder organization is in danger. To much places where part of the community what to decide by and for them twelve and to much risk (and possibility) to leave ICANN (like PTI) to other structure less multistakholder.
Last (but not least): are we sure that all the current bylaws about ALAC (and at-Large) must stay in the future standard Bylaws?
Thanks for reading.
Hope it is clear.
Available for exchanges.
PS: A face to face would have been useful to discuss in depth this ccwg (or the next one) report on ICANN accountability.
All the best
Skills are useful but diversity is essential.
Sébastien Bachollet
+33 6 07 66 89 33
The IANA Issues WG met on Friday to discuss possible issue on the
CCWG-Accountability 3rd draft proposal.
The CCWG documents can be founds at
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=56145016.
The document discussed at the IANA-Issues meeting can be found linked to
the Agenda Item 3 of
https://community.icann.org/x/PIdlAw (entitled
Review of Proposal
and Potential ALAC Positions).
We need to send a summary of our comments to the CCWG today (in time for
a CCWG meeting on Tuesday at 06:00 UTC). The attached document summarizes
the issues as modified by the discussion during the
teleconference.
Please send any comments in sufficient time for me to integrate them (as
appropriate) into the documents. In particular, is there anything here
that is counter to the tone or detail of the discussion?
The Final Public Comment must be submitted no later than 21 December. It
will no doubt closely follow the attached document, but may well include
other issues that come to light over the next days.
As ALL ALAC member will be asked to vote on the Public Comments and will
ultimately have to decide whether to ratify the CCWG Proposal, this is
both important and time-sensitive.
To the extent that is possible and you feel appropriate, please involve
your RALOs.
Alan