Karl,
In conclusion, I am once again stunned that ICANN permitted money to be spent in the creation of this document.
I don't think that the ICANN Board should go into details like what document the Ombudsman should or should not develop and publish. I am convinced that the actual system, that gives the Ombudsman latitude in the way he/she will use her/his budget is appropriate. Best regards, Roberto
-----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Karl Auerbach Sent: Wednesday, 13 May 2009 20:47 To: At-Large Worldwide Cc: avri@acm.org; council@gnso.icann.org; ccnso-council@icann.org; louie@equinix.com; Disspain; janis.karklins@icann.org; jun@wide.ad.jp; Steve Crocker; Charles A. (Chuck) Gomes; liaison6c@gnso.icann.org; policy@icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] Respectful Online Communication and Behavior
Frank Fowlie wrote:
I don't believe that there is anything strange or naïve in the expectation that participants in an organization which represents a global community would conduct themselves at a level of discourse and behaviour that includes respectful communication.
You seem to have entirely missed the point of my note.
Yesterday I visited the home of Thomas Jefferson, the man who drafted the United States' Declaration of Independence. The Declaration was drafted in the most respectful of terms but it stated with clarity and force an utter repudiation of the king's position.
The core of your document is not respect but self emasculation:
Your document tells us to "exercis[e] independent judgment based solely on what is in the overall best interest of Internet users and the stability and security of the Internet's system of unique identifiers, irrespective of personal interests and the interests of the entity to which an individual might owe their appointment."
ICANN's board members do in fact have a fiduciary duty that somewhat resembles the above. But we are not board members.
And ICANN employees are required in the course of their jobs to follow the policies set forth by ICANN's board. But we are not ICANN employees.
Those of us who argue for positions within ICANN are entitled to argue for our own values. We may use such means of expression as we feel most appropriate.
Further, many of us are attorneys who represent clients in these matters. It would be a violation of our professional obligations to our clients were we to set aside their interests and substitute your "overall best interest of the Internet user" standard. Others, who work form corporate "stakeholders" within ICANN would often be in dereliction of their own duties to their employers were they to set aside the interests of their employer.
Your note is out of touch with the ICANN that exists. ICANN is a system of economic regulation of the domain name space. ICANN does virtually nothing that pertains to the "stability and security of the Internet's system of unique identifiers".
In conclusion, I am once again stunned that ICANN permitted money to be spent in the creation of this document.
--karl--
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlar ge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org