<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [governance] ICANN RFC on its performance</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>Hi Kieren,<BR>
<BR>
Just one perhaps unusual (and given the comments that will probably ensue, somewhat off topic) thought. You suggest that, “the idea of discussing ICANN at the IGF is, I assume, in order to draw attention to the elements of the ICANN model that people don’t think are working properly.” That’s one idea, but there are other possibilities in such a dialogue, including highlighting the bits that do work relatively well, and considering whether these offer any generalizable lessons worth applying elsewhere. For example, long ago and far away, the WGIG did a little exercise where we tried to look at how some of the key organizations did or didn’t comply with the WSIS principles. When we compared ITU and ICANN it became immediately evident that the latter was more transparent and inclusively participatory/multistakeholder, which made the notion of somehow transferring functions to the ITU even more patently indefensible, and it disappeared from the debate. Proponents of intergovernmental ‘oversight’ were then left to propose various sorts new councils etc. that were plainly not going to go anywhere. <BR>
<BR>
An instinctive ‘circle the wagons’ response to proposals for mere discussion may be as contrary to ICANN’s long-term interests as it is to preferences of ICANN’s critics. Why not view this as an unique opportunity tell ICANN’s story and carpe diem, rather than shutting it down? And BTW, while there are undoubtedly people with grievances “that are rapidly becoming historical,” that’s not what the caucus is proposing to talk about. We deleted the history language long ago and suggested discussion of, “ICANN's status as an international organization, its representation of various constituencies and stakeholders, and the changing role of the GAC within ICANN,” which are forward looking topics.<BR>
<BR>
Best,<BR>
<BR>
Bill<BR>
<BR>
On 5/12/07 4:26 PM, "Kieren McCarthy" <kierenmccarthy@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR="#000080"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>I recognise that raising this may be the online equivalent of throwing a lump of meat to a pack of starving wolves, but then *<B>not raising it</B>* seemed more stupid to me because of the depth of knowledge and expertise on this list.<BR>
<BR>
ICANN has put out a Request for Comments on its performance. And since this list seems to discuss little else, I really think you should review it and get involved. <BR>
<BR>
Taking my newly acquired ICANN hat off for a second, the idea of discussing ICANN at the IGF is, I assume, in order to draw attention to the elements of the ICANN model that people don’t think are working properly. There are some genuine grievances there and it’s understandable that people would wish them raised at the Internet Governance Forum. I would argue however that most of these grievances are rapidly becoming historical, and that is the reason why the IGF will likely not discuss them.<BR>
<BR>
For those people that are driven solely by a desire to improve the Internet and its functioning – and I think it’s a real shame that you can’t simply assume that – one of the most effective ways of doing that will be to work within ICANN’s self-changing processes. <BR>
<BR>
ICANN hat back on (yes, it was off for that last paragraph). The RFC is out there for public comment. It is structured around a series of questions about how ICANN is doing and how it has done (I will list them below). <BR>
<BR>
I am ICANN’s general manager of public participation. That means I consider it *<B>my job</B>* to encourage participation and input from the Internet community. I also consider it my job to make sure that input is heard at the relevant levels within ICANN.<BR>
<BR>
I am sure this post will attract the usual personal insults but my record stands for itself when it comes to publicly raising issues in this field. I would request that people make use of that.<BR>
<BR>
Let me make it quite plain though, the RFC is not about rolling out the usual fantasies about how ICANN can be restructured, or moaning about something that happened three or more years ago. As far as ICANN is concerned, those days are over and now it is all about getting the job done. So any feedback that focuses on helping ICANN get the job done will be gratefully received. Plus feedback on recent changes in ICANN – if ICANN is going along the right path. Do provide your views with as many facts as possible. They will be listened to.<BR>
<BR>
If you do not want to provide this sort of feedback, for whatever reason, then please do not waste your time and mine writing a diatribe and then expect it to be included in discussions. You can continue trying to get your issues raised outside ICANN. For those that want to provide ICANN with a helpful outside perspective however, please do respond.<BR>
<BR>
The deadline is 5 June. If there is enough material on ICANN’s sites on 6 June (note: not on this governance mailing list – I will not be considering material in response to this post) to justify it, I will put in a request for a meeting at San Juan where we can discuss this topic openly and freely and I’ll stick myself in as the organiser. I will then produce a report on what is discussed and I will make sure that everyone in ICANN knows about it, from the receptionist to the CEO. But that’s only if the material is useful and if there is enough of it. If it is, as I fear it will be, the usual rants with a smattering of other comments, I have plenty of other things to take up my time.<BR>
<BR>
So, that RFC:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'>As part of an ongoing interest in continuous improvement, ICANN is seeking community feedback about its performance. <BR>
</SPAN></FONT><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'><BR>
</SPAN></FONT><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'>All responses are welcome. Targeted comments regarding several areas of performance, which have been drawn from the ICANN Strategic Plan, are of particular interest:<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><UL><LI><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'>Is ICANN becoming more transparent, accessible and accountable? What improvements have been observed and what still needs to be done?</SPAN></FONT><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>
</SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'>Has ICANN improved its operational performance? What improvements have been observed and what still needs to be done?</SPAN></FONT><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>
</SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'>Has ICANN improved its performance in the development of Policy? What improvements have been observed and what still needs to be done?</SPAN></FONT><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>
</SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'>Has ICANN increased international participation? What improvements have been observed and what still needs to be done?</SPAN></FONT><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>
</SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'>Have there been improvements in participation and in efficiency of the ICANN multi-stakeholder model? What more needs to be done?</SPAN></FONT><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>
</SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'>What plans and actions have been observed that position ICANN for more comprehensive transition of the technical coordination of the Internet’s system of unique identifiers. What more needs to be done?</SPAN></FONT><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>
</SPAN></FONT><LI><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'>What improvements have been made in dispute resolution and the application of fairness and equity in the management of complaints and other mechanisms of review that are available? These include the work of the reconsideration committee, the Ombudsman and independent review.</SPAN></FONT><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></UL><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'>Comments will be received at <a href="http://forum.icann.org/lists/performance-2007/">http://forum.icann.org/lists/performance-2007/</a> until June 5, 2007 and should be sent to: performance-2007@icann.org.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000080"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
You can see this announcement here: <a href="http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-08may07.htm">http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-08may07.htm</a><BR>
<BR>
I have also put up a blog post about it (open to comments) here: <a href="http://blog.icann.org/?p=125">http://blog.icann.org/?p=125</a><BR>
<BR>
And I have created a page on the Public Participation site (wide open and proud of it) here: <a href="http://public.icann.org/issues/performance">http://public.icann.org/issues/performance</a><BR>
<BR>
Feel free to discuss freely on the Public Participation site. If you want a chatroom for it, just ask. If you want a structured forum page for it, just ask.<BR>
<BR>
And please do spread the news of this RFC as far and as wide as you can.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Cheers. See you all in Geneva in a few weeks.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Kieren<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'><BR>
</SPAN><FONT COLOR="#000080"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
Kieren McCarthy<BR>
General manager of public participation, ICANN<BR>
<BR>
kieren.mccarthy@icann.org<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'><BR>
<HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="95%">____________________________________________________________<BR>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
<BR>
For all list information and functions, see:<BR>
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'><BR>
<BR>
***********************************************************<BR>
William J. Drake drake@hei.unige.ch<BR>
Director, Project on the Information<BR>
Revolution and Global Governance/PSIO<BR>
Graduate Institute for International Studies<BR>
Geneva, Switzerland<BR>
<a href="http://hei.unige.ch/psio/researchprojects/Drake.html">http://hei.unige.ch/psio/researchprojects/Drake.html</a><BR>
***********************************************************<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>