<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:OpenSans;
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I think you trivialize the issues here… if you include in “organization of the process”— determining modes (and costs) of participation, organization of the modality of the meeting (location, participation fee, language, electronic supports), selectively providing “bursaries” for participation, designing inclusions/exclusions from the agenda etc.etc.) then having an influence on these, even if indirect, may be highly significant in influencing outcomes.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>M<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'> discuss-bounces@1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces@1net.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>joseph alhadeff<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:15 AM<br><b>To:</b> discuss@1net.org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [discuss] Opportunity for input on the development process for IANAoversight transition plan<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>If we can appropriately segregate the topics of the organization of the process (who pours the coffee and buys the donuts), the decision-making in the process and method of consultation with a broad range of groups we may well be able to address issues of possible conflict.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On 3/25/2014 6:07 AM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p>Hello Nick,<o:p></o:p></p><p>The way I see it, the stakeholder leaders and ICANN are part of the review team(as I used number 5x4=20 as an example) so even if it's taken to an independent review team. There is noting that makes the same concern not applicable (the independent review team could also have an affiliation with other stakeholder member)<br>The situation we have here is not like an external auditor reviewing (auditing) a company account. In this case, the external auditor belongs to one of the stakeholder and then a return to the status-quo of possible conflict of interest. Hence the reason why a collective review will be most desirable.<o:p></o:p></p><p>Cheers!<o:p></o:p></p><p>Regards<br>sent from Google nexus 4<br>kindly excuse brevity and typos.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On 25 Mar 2014 17:24, "Nick Ashton-Hart" <<a href="mailto:nashton@ccianet.org">nashton@ccianet.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Dear Seun, <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Thanks for your comments, and while I understand you do not see a conflict of interest issue, I can assure you: there are others who absolutely will. If major governments were to decide that they didn't like the result of the process they could suggest that it was flawed due to the conflicts issue. <o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On 25 Mar 2014, at 10:06, Seun Ojedeji <<a href="mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com" target="_blank">seun.ojedeji@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><p style='text-align:start;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-family:"OpenSans","serif"'>Hello Nick, kindly find my response inset<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='text-align:start;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-family:"OpenSans","serif"'>sent from Google nexus 4<br>kindly excuse brevity and typos.<br>On 25 Mar 2014 16:51, "Nick Ashton-Hart" <<a href="mailto:nashton@ccianet.org" target="_blank">nashton@ccianet.org</a>> wrote:<br>><br>> Dear Seun, these are useful ideas, but I think there's a step that needs to happen in advance of this.<br>><br>> The first question to ask is: Should ICANN staff oversee the consultation process, or should it be non-staff-led?<br>><br>Well the NTIA determined that ICANN would coordinate this and really unless we are not being transparent in the process, it should not necessarily be a major issue. Again remember that all ICANN will be doing is administrative and the final resolution will be at the 1 time neutral ground event.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='text-align:start;word-spacing:0px'><span style='font-family:"OpenSans","serif"'>> I think there's a problem if ICANN - or the RIR - staff this directly for several reasons, most profoundly that there are stakeholders that will see it as a conflict of interest for staff members to run a process that affects the organisation that pays them every month. <br>><br>The only place I foresee there could be an issue is the categorisation so perhaps the categorisation of the contributions can be done with the 20 stakeholder reps in sync.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>discuss mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><a href="mailto:discuss@1net.org">discuss@1net.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre><a href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>