[discuss] [IANAxfer] [ccnso-igrg] Two accountability questions - help pls- Workshop 23 - ICANN accountability
bzs at world.std.com
Thu Sep 11 20:45:01 UTC 2014
On September 11, 2014 at 13:57 ajs at anvilwalrusden.com (Andrew Sullivan) wrote:
> > My tendency would be to put that power with the other major I*
> > organizations, similar to the selection of the IETF, ASO/AC, etc,
> > board seats. ICANN per se would get one seat.
> > I'd envision such a group as being small.
> That sounds like a new organization. I don't think it can be
> constituted in time. Also, I don't really see why (for instance) the
> IAB or IESG ought to have anything to say _qua_ IAB/IESG about the
> names policy ICANN comes up with in its policy-generation role.
> Speaking personally, I'm a volunteer with enough to do already -- what
> reason would I have to start reviewing every decision the ICANN board
> makes? Especially ,Ab&(B
I was describing how we'd populate an independent judiciary within
ICANN as proposed in the earlier paragraph.
So, I think we agree in principle.
It would only take some ICANN by-law changes and other creation
As you suggested this would seem to be the least disruptive to
the current ecosystem and would fulfill NTIA's goals.
Again for anyone who wants a review:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 01:32:31PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote:
> I don't understand why something like an "independent judiciary"
> couldn't operate within ICANN via some by-laws changes giving them
> certain powers vis a vis the board of directors.
And if it concurs with an earlier suggestion by John Curran all the
The World | bzs at TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
More information about the discuss