I agree with almost everything Seun said. This is not an easy issue. and to solve problems, it’s better to do it in the narrowest circle. If it wasn’t possible, we need to go through the rules in place.
The situation in LACRALO is very complicated. It is mainly a problem of trust. We have to find the right balance between the bottom-up nature of our work an d the independence of our RALOs from one side, and the need for a harmonious and productive climate inside each RALO on the other. As Alan and others said, it will need to be addressed by the forthcoming review to set up the right mechanisms for dispute resolution not only inside one RALO, but everywhere it may happen in the At-Large community.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tijani BEN JEMAA
Executive Director
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)
Phone: +216 98 330 114
             +216 52 385 114
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------




Le 19 févr. 2016 à 03:50, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> a écrit :

Hi,

Honestly I am not sure I have good clarity yet on what ICANN staff would have done differently (well except for the Ombudsman's response). I think staff tries to provide information and facts as much as possible while leaving it to the community to decide(which is the right thing to do in this situation).

We probably would have had issues as well if staff used veto over the decision of LACRALO leadership, as certain level of independence is required.

Overall, I think this is a very delicate situation and we need to be careful on how we handle this without giving the impression that we as a community cannot resolve our challenges internally without relying on staff. I think bullet point 2 of the document shared by Dave is a critical thing we need to look at.

I am particularly concerned that this issue has lingered thus far. I encourage the ALAC Chair to give this issue full priority(just incase this hasn't happen), it's also something the ALT can take-up formerly pending review of ALAC process.

Regards

On 19 Feb 2016 12:53 a.m., "Bill Silverstein" <icann-list@sorehands.com> wrote:
How about a class action against ICANN for the damage they caused by
overloading all our irony detectors?

I am confused. How is can a organization founded upon lack of
accountability and lack of transparency discuss standards for
accountability and transparency?

On Thu, February 18, 2016 2:25 pm, John R. Levine wrote:
>>> 1. ....I am
>>> afraid that this is currently been carried out within ICANN staff and I
>>> cannot provide further details other than to say something is
>>> happening.
>>
>> Does anyone other than myself find it ironic that a discussion of
>> accountability and transparency is, itself, subject to a lack of both
>> accountability and transparency?
>
> This is ICANN.  Our irony-o-meters burned out years ago.
>
> R's,
> John
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>

_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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