Edward — thanks, we just added this stress test in category IV. We have not yet applied this stress test to the existing and proposed accountability measures, but will discuss when we meet in Istanbul. Meanwhile, please feel free to suggest text we could use for each section (below): Stress Test #__. During implementation of a properly-approved policy, ICANN staff substitutes their preferences and creates processes that effectively change or negate the policy developed. Whether staff do so intentionally or unintentionally, the result is the same. Consequence: Existing Accountability Measures: Proposed Accountability Measures: Conclusion: — Steve From: Edward Morris Date: Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 7:51 PM Cc: "ccwg-accountability4@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-accountability4@icann.org>" Subject: [ST-WP] Additional Stress Test for consideration Hi everybody, During a call today regarding ICANN’s transition and accountability, David Post called for development of a stress test we don’t currently have. I’d like to present it to the sub-group for consideration with the recommendation we act positively on his recommendation. This would belong in Stress Test Category Four: Failure of Accountability. The problem is one some of us believe we’ve encountered with increasing frequency at ICANN: staff substituting their policy preferences for the policy developed through proper processes. Staff could do this intentionally or unintentionally. The result is the same. In this scenario a policy is properly developed (most often through a PDP) but when implementing the policy staff creates processes that effectively change or negate the policy developed. This is a major accountability problem and we don’t seem to be testing to ensure we have proper accountability processes in place to deal with it. I’d suggest we do so. I’m happy to help with this as needed. Thanks for considering. Edward Morris