[discuss] [IANAxfer] [ccnso-igrg] Two accountability questions - help pls- Workshop 23 - ICANN accountability

Barry Shein 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

        -Barry Shein

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 mailing list