On 11/22/2010 04:12 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
... The Board was given poor and in at least some cases, completely inaccurate source information upon which to make decisions.
This makes a compelling argument why ICANN board members ought to create a public, written record for every decision they make or refrain from making that includes: - A restatement and summary of the the perceived question and the issues being faced (the restatement helps to highlight ambiguities in understanding and interpretation.) - A summary or permanently available reference to the facts and other input used in the making of the decision (or in the making of the decision not to make a decision) - A listing of the criteria - A statement that exposes the logical path of the decision, weighs the evaluates the facts, measures those facts against the stated criteria, and measures, qualitatively if not quantitatively, the weights of the competing interests. - The conclusion - Reservations I tried to do this when I was on the board. It is not an easy thing to do particularly when one is exhausted after a long sequence of meetings. A decent respect to the opinions of the public and to the historical record requires that this be done. And even if non ALAC selected directors don't do this, the ALAC one ought to pledge to do it. When I did it I tried to describe only my own actions and not to reflect on the motives, methods, or choices of other board members. This kind of practice, were it adopted, serves several purposes: 1. It would help mitigate the kinds of situations which you (Evan) describe. 2. It would improve the transparency of ICANN decision making. 3. It would give each board member who does this a timely written business record that could be used to support a business judgment defense should legal action be taken against ICANN. (It is naive to believe that director liability insurance is an impenetrable protective shield.) --karl--