February 2009 - NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

ALS application from Papergate
by At-Large Staff March 31, 2009

March 31, 2009

Dear all, This is to inform you that we received an At-Large Structure application from Papergate, an organization based in Shade Gap, Pennsylvania. Please find it attached to this email. Papergate would be a member of the North American Regional At-Large Organisation if accepted. We are currently conducting due diligence on the applicant and will send you further information in due course. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Heidi Ullrich, Gisella Gruber-White, Marie-Hélène Bouchoms ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

6 7

Link
by Glenn McKnight Feb. 28, 2009

Feb. 28, 2009

I sent a link to the PDF on the final report by One World Trust which detailed these documents. Unfortunately the link is Forbidden. http://www.oneworldtrust.org/index.php?searchword=ICANN&ordering=&searchphr… The first report is available as a PDF a 68 page document 1. Independent Review of ICANN’s Accountability<http://www.oneworldtrust.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&…> Category: Download:Publications by project/Global Accountability Report/Case study and accoutability practice Monday, 17 November 2008 2. OWT_ICANN_Report__Final_.pdf<http://www.oneworldtrust.org/dmdocuments/OWT_ICANN_Report__Final_.pdf> Category: PDF Independent Review of ICANN's Accountability and Transparency ... 3. OWT_ICANN_Report__Final_.pdf<http://www.oneworldtrust.org/dmdocuments/OWT_ICANN_Report__Final_.pdf> Category: PDF -- Glenn McKnight 868 Corbetts Road Oshawa, Ontario L1K 2E1 905-434-6655 mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com skype gmcknight http://newsocialmedia.wordpress.com

1 0

Open Trust Review of ICANN
by Glenn McKnight Feb. 28, 2009

Feb. 28, 2009

http://bit.ly/18uJsM Open Trust Report on ICANN -- Glenn McKnight 868 Corbetts Road Oshawa, Ontario L1K 2E1 905-434-6655 mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com skype gmcknight http://newsocialmedia.wordpress.com

2 1

One World Trust
by Glenn McKnight Feb. 28, 2009

Feb. 28, 2009

Paul Levins mentioned that ICANN is using One world Trust www.oneworldtrust.org/ Quote *One World Trust projects contribute to the understanding of how the accountability of global governance processes to people affected by them can be increased. Projects focus on one or more of three vital streams of global governance processes: the accountability of global organisations, the engagement of citizens in governance, and international law and regulation.* -- Glenn McKnight 868 Corbetts Road Oshawa, Ontario L1K 2E1 905-434-6655 mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com skype gmcknight http://newsocialmedia.wordpress.com

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] Another Joke from Westlake Consulting
by Annette Muehlberg Feb. 28, 2009

Feb. 28, 2009

that`s true. annette > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: "Evan Leibovitch" <evan(a)telly.org> > Gesendet: 28.02.09 19:58:10 > An: Annette Muehlberg <Annette.Muehlberg(a)web.de> > CC: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA>, na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Betreff: Re: [NA-Discuss] Another Joke from Westlake Consulting > Annette Muehlberg wrote: > > remember the paris meeting last year? i made a statement on the panel, that not a single one of my statements found its way into the westlake review (and i spent a whole lot of time in interview with and sending material and proposals to them). > > > > as i was very much involved in setting up the ralos as the chair of alac, tricia said that the board governance committee's alac review working group would be very interested in listening to my analysis of structural problems of the alac and of staff as well as to my proposals for improvement. as is said i would not spent anymore time in online comments, she promised i would be called by the alac review working group. > > i have never been called. > > > On the positive side, Tricia and the BGC have essentially gutted the > worst of Westlake and produced a recommendaton I can support as a step > in the right direction. I can't say that they heard your specific > comments but they obviously did heed some of the comments that disputed > Westlake's report. > > The Cairo response to the ALAC review process was far more positive than > it was in Paris. > > - Evan > > > --

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] Another Joke from Westlake Consulting
by Annette Muehlberg Feb. 28, 2009

Feb. 28, 2009

no surprise to me. remember the paris meeting last year? i made a statement on the panel, that not a single one of my statements found its way into the westlake review (and i spent a whole lot of time in interview with and sending material and proposals to them). as i was very much involved in setting up the ralos as the chair of alac, tricia said that the board governance committee's alac review working group would be very interested in listening to my analysis of structural problems of the alac and of staff as well as to my proposals for improvement. as is said i would not spent anymore time in online comments, she promised i would be called by the alac review working group. i have never been called. best greetings annette > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson(a)GOV.NU.CA> > Gesendet: 25.02.09 06:08:15 > An: <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Betreff: Re: [NA-Discuss] Another Joke from Westlake Consulting > Another thing that has been bothering me about Westlake: > > I have been asking and asking, since Delhi, about the lack of transparency around how Westlake got the contract - especially since they applied late when other organizations applied on time - and I have YET to receive ANY kind of answer from Tricia Drakes (sp?), anybody on that team, or anybody whatsoever. I keep getting told that they are really, really busy and will get back to me shortly... or after the next meeting... or... or... It just goes on and on and I still have nothing. > > This is starting to drive me nuts. If we cannot expect ICANN to keep to their own contracting procedures, what can we expect. > > D > > Darlene A. Thompson > CAP Administrator > Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP > P.O. Box 1000, Sation 910 > Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 > Phone: (867) 975-5631 > Fax: (867) 975-5610 > E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > > ________________________________ > > From: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Danny Younger > Sent: Tue 2/24/2009 4:01 PM > To: na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Subject: [NA-Discuss] Another Joke from Westlake Consulting > > > > > http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/rssac/rssac-final-report-24feb09-en.pdf > > > > > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org <http://www.naralo.org/> > ------ > > > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------ > --

3 2

my comment in the Ombudsman Blog
by Edward Hasbrouck Feb. 28, 2009

Feb. 28, 2009

The morning after I re-posted my comment at ICANNwatch.org and to the GA and At-Large NA-Discuss ICANN mailing lists, and sent a copy by e-mail to the "Ombudsman", my comment reappeared in the ICANN Ombudsman Blog. Detailed background is at: http://hasbrouck.org/icann ---------------- Edward Hasbrouck <edward(a)hasbrouck.org> <http://hasbrouck.org> +1-415-824-0214

1 0

Chat Site
by Glenn McKnight Feb. 28, 2009

Feb. 28, 2009

Hi I was told that the coordinates for the Online Chat was emailed. I did not get this email G -- Glenn McKnight 868 Corbetts Road Oshawa, Ontario L1K 2E1 905-434-6655 mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com skype gmcknight http://newsocialmedia.wordpress.com

1 0

Follow-up re: Approval of Ombudsman (Framework)
by Edward Hasbrouck Feb. 28, 2009

Feb. 28, 2009

The person claiming to act as Ombudsman has posted comments on my previous message in his blog: https://omblog.icann.org/?p=105 I posted a comment "Ombudsman blog", but it was deleted less than an hour later. So I'm re-posting it here (and at ICANNwatch.org) Mr. Fowlie: You say that, “The Ombuds Blog has the information concerning the Board of Directors meeting item correctly, while Mr. Hasbrouck does not.” I accurately quoted from the page on the ICANN web site to which I linked, as it read at the time of my post. That page was updated on 24 February 2009, after my article was published, to change the agenda item from “Approval of Ombudsman” (as I had quoted) to “Approval of Ombudsman Framework”. As of today, the original lannguage I quoted, “Approval of Ombudsman”, remains on another page on the ICANN Web site at: http://mex.icann.org/node/2689 I stand by my story. It was based, as it clearly stated, on what was posted on ICANN’s Web site, which I reported accurately. You say that, “The Ombudsman was appointed on November 1, 2004, with the appointment consistent with ICANN’s Bylaw V.” That is not correct. That Bylaw requires that, “The Ombudsman shall be appointed by the Board for an initial term of two years, subject to renewal by the Board.” No notice or minutes of any Board meeting on 1 November 2004 have been posted. So whatever happened on that day, it didn’t constitute appointment of an Ombudsman in accordance with the Bylaws. And any appointment would have been for 2 years, unless renewed by the Board, and would have expired unless renewed. There is no record of any such renewal by the Board. Your failure to notice that your appointment as Ombudsman would require Board action, both initially and for renewal after 2 years, reflects poorly on your fitness for the position. Obviously, that would be a factor to be considered were you now to be proposed for appointment as Ombudsman. The portion of the transcript that you reproduce makes explicit that you communicated with the Reconsideration Committee about a request I had made for reconsideration, and about what you describe as “MR. HASBROUCK’S APPLICATION FOR INDEPENDENT REVIEW THAT HAD NOT YET BEEN FILED, WHICH WAS BEING DISTRIBUTED AND WAS BASICALLY ON THE SAME GROUNDS”. (As I have written previously, I don’t know what is meant by the latter reference, since at no time before I filed it was my request for independent review “being distributed” to you or anyone else, to the best of my knowledge and belief.) Your communications with the Reconsideration Committee about my request for your assistance (on a separate matter than the subject of my request for reconsideration) were in violation of your obligation to me of confidentiality. This is your obligation under the Bylaws, under the Ombudsman Framework, and under the principles of professional ethics to which you claim to subscribe. I hereby request that you refer me to any professional ethics oversight bodies to which you subscribe, for investigation of this complaint that you have violated your obligation of confidentiality, and imposition of sanctions, or that you refer this matter directly to them, in accordance with their procedures for such complaints, with a request that they contact me. Whatever was contained in your communications with the Reconsideration Committee, they were not, are not, and cannot be (without further violations of confidentiality and the Bylaws) placed in the public record. By basing its decisions on those communications, the Reconsideration Committee violated its obligation under the Bylaws: “The Reconsideration Committee shall act on a Reconsideration Request on the basis of the public written record.” I do not know why you chose to breach the confidentiality of our communications, to intervene in the proceedings of the Reconsideration Committee, or to engage in communications with them which you knew, or reasonably should have known, could not be used as any part of the basis for their decision. These, too, would be factors to be considered were you now to be proposed for appointment as Ombudsman. Sincerely, Edward Hasbrouck http://hasbrouck.org/icann ---------------- Edward Hasbrouck <edward(a)hasbrouck.org> <http://hasbrouck.org> +1-415-824-0214

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] approval of Ombudsman?
by Annette Muehlberg Feb. 25, 2009

Feb. 25, 2009

hi john, what a funny story - all these foolish inquisitionary discussions with someone who never got appointed? what a lot of work 2 years ago, and one of the reasons you left the alac. too bad. all the best to you annette > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: "Edward Hasbrouck" <edward(a)hasbrouck.org> > Gesendet: 24.02.09 21:21:48 > An: na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Betreff: [NA-Discuss] approval of Ombudsman? > A mysterious item has appeared on the Board meeting page in the agenda for > the 6 March 2009 Board meeting in Mexico City: "Approval of Ombudsman". > > I suspect this means that ICANN has finally noticed from my recent > comments on the abolition of the Reconsideration Committee that they have > never appointed an Ombudsman, and have thus been in violation of their > Bylaws. I don't know why they have finally noticed or decided to act: > > http://forum.icann.org/lists/recon-bylaws-revision/msg00001.html > > There is no formal proposal yet posted for the appointment of an > Ombudsman. > > In any event, the (illegal) "incumbent" is clearly disqualified: > > http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/001196.html > > It's apparently now time for the community, or would-be candidates > themselves, to put forward nominations for the position of ICANN Ombudsman > -- if you can figure out the correct point of contact for such > nominations. It would seem that the choice of Ombudsman would be > especially important to individual Internet users, and thus to ALS's and > ALAC. > > I pointed out the failure to have a properly appointed Ombudsman in 2007: > > http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga/msg06893.html > > I have more comments on this at ICANNwatch: > > http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/24/0023205 > > > ---------------- > Edward Hasbrouck > <edward(a)hasbrouck.org> > <http://hasbrouck.org> > +1-415-824-0214 > > > > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------ > --

1 0