[discuss] Who-and-where vs. what

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 05:23:26PM -0700, Mike Roberts wrote:

> Unfortunately, the “best interests of ICANN” creates a presumption
> in the minds of some that there is a distinction between corporate
> self-aggrandizement, and pursuit of the organizational mission.

This is why I find intriguing the suggestion that some mechanism could
be added to the bylaws to offer a corrective.  If such decisions could
be overruled in some way (by participants in the activities of the
corporation), then that would be additional evidence about the best
interests of ICANN (which among other things surely involves achieving
its policy ends).  Similarly, if there were a mechanism to remove a
board member, that would perhaps offer a mechanism to inform board
members of the interests of the corporation.

John Curran's suggestion, elsewhere in this thread, that it be
undertaken using a supermajority of all SOs in every case is certainly
an intriguing one.  In effect, this would permit some of the
advantages of a membership corporation without some of the significant
disadvantages such a corporate structure brings.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com