Jan. 5, 2022
5:14 a.m.
On 05/01/22 2:35 am, Vanda Scartezini via At-Large wrote: > > Roberto & all interested friends. > > I totally agree with Roberto that was irrelevant for us – AT Large > focused members – say anything about person and not the process. > Vanda Two things were said: (1) I think there is a conflict of interest, and therefore the concerned party should step down. (2) the COI statement is prima facie inappropriate (substantiating matter was provided that I dont think has been countered till now). I understand that you think that these are personal and not process-related statements, right? In that case, what I have to say is this: If you indeed want to run the (supposedly) public interest communities around an important global public interest governance function as they were some collegial cocktail parties, then it is entirely your choice. But, then, God save this system -- it is only headed down and downer, as we have seen it go over the years. It is these attitudes responsible for the system's or organization's decay (at least in the eyes of the outsiders).... Now, you are welcome to call even this is a personal and not process-related statement. Be my guest! I have enough knowledge an experience n how external public interest vigil is kept on public governance systems and bodies... But you need not ask me. If you only care, there is a lot of material out there accessible through search engines. > I have abstained myself commenting on the exchange of messages. > In fact, if I were to press hard, your such 'holding my nose' statements are rather personal statements against me -- as someone doing some nefarious work, worthy of collective condemnation -- when i am only doing a genuine public interest work, which indeed all other, more present here, including yourself, should be doing... parminder > Sebastien is al right. We should read! > > > > */Vanda Scartezini/* > > */Polo Consultores Associados/* > > */Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004/* > > */Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 /* > > */Sorry for any typos. /* > > > > > > > > > > > > *From: *At-Large <at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf > of Sebastien Bachollet via At-Large <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > *Date: *Tuesday, January 4, 2022 at 16:14 > *To: *Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com> > *Cc: *At Large <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > *Subject: *Re: [At-Large] Separate issues > > Sorry it was send only to Roberto > Here it is > > +1 > I must add that regarding A&T the ATRT3 final report is worth reading > And hopefully acting soon > Happy new year to all > > Sébastien Bachollet > Envoyé de mon iPhone > > > Le 4 janv. 2022 à 09:07, Roberto Gaetano via At-Large > <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> a écrit : > > > > Hi all > > > > IMHO, we have separate issues that we might want to keep separated. > > > > The first issue is about the original point Jeff is making, about > whether there is a problem about whether his reconsideration request > has been properly dealt with and/or there has been a retaliation or > other consequences. This is a question about the process, not the > person, and I am extremely surprised that it spawned consideration > about the person. It is by and large irrelevant whether Jeff has a > conflict of interest, ALAC should look a the process itself and if > there has been some misbehaviour - or even a mistaken in the process - > it should act regardless what role the claimant has and not wait until > the same issue hits a person that does not have any involvement with > the contracted parties. > > > > The second issue is about the conflict of interest. Here as well we > must abstract from the specific case and ask whether the CoI policy is > sound or need modification. IANAL, but it looks to me that the > procedure followed by Jeff is the correct one as related to his > nomination: he has declared his potential conflict at application > time, correctly omitting the name of the TLD he might get involved in. > Sure, he should have updated his SOI more promptly. OTOH, I doubt that > any subscriber to this mailing list does not know the involvement of > Jeff with the contracted parties. So, the question is whether the CoI > policy and the management (and actualisation) of SOIs are sound or > need revision, and that is again something that is orthogonal to the > practical case. > > > > Last but not least, the Multi-Stakeholder Model. I am not a > theorist, so my opinion is not authoritative, but I personally believe > that a process in which all potential stakeholders are involved > guarantees better - and more stable - results than a process in which > some forces are prevailing over others. I can discuss whether ICANN > applies it correctly, whether it is necessary to improve it to make it > “global” (i.e. independent from geopolitics) and “equal” (i.e. with a > balanced power of the stakeholders), but I firmly believe that this is > the best answer - surely superior to the classical multilateral > approach, that gives the ultimate power to agreement by the > governments. I agree that some, but not all, the UN organisations have > introduced some perfume of involvement by other stakeholder types, > whether business, civil society, or other, but we cannot forget that > the ultimate power of the UN system resides in the UNGA, where the > vote is cast by the governments only. > > > > Just an additional note about the last point, related to ICANN’s > model. I personally believe that nowadays the table is tilted to > favour contracted parties, and the fact that some business interests > are linked to contracted parties makes the matter even worse, but I > also believe that a sort of people’s tribunal whether it is the users > - or even generally the non-contracted parties - the sole arbiter of > the behaviour of the contracted parties is a non-starter. Of course, > we should achieve better collaboration among stakeholders while > sometimes we have confrontation with little effort to reach a > compromise, but this only means to me that the model has to be > improved, not abandoned. > > > > Cheers, and Happy New Year > > Roberto > > > > _______________________________________________ > > At-Large mailing list > > At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large> > > > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > <http://atlarge.icann.org> > > _______________________________________________ > > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of > your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list > accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy > (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy > <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms of > Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos > <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>). You can visit the Mailman link > above to change your membership status or configuration, including > unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery > altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large> > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > <http://atlarge.icann.org> > _______________________________________________ > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of > your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list > accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy > (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy > <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms of > Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos > <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>). You can visit the Mailman link > above to change your membership status or configuration, including > unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery > altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. > > > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > _______________________________________________ > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.