[governance] oversight

[Danny Butt]

Jeanette's suggestion makes a lot of sense to me. As well as not  
being able to gain agreement on the role of governments, I don't  
think that it's something that governments will take much notice of.  
A viable proposal for how the non-government aspects of internet  
governance can be revised in accordance with WSIS principles will, I  
think, be seen by all players as a valuable contribution. That will  
also be a strong base from which to make comments on governmental  
activities (e.g. USG oversight) or proposals (e.g. GAC power).

Cheers

Danny

-- 
Danny Butt
db at dannybutt.net | http://www.dannybutt.net



On 13/10/2005, at 2:30 AM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:

>  From what I have seen on this list, our positions are not that far
> apart. A compromise seems possible if we ignore the role of  
> governments
> for a moment and specify instead the forms of controls we regard as
> necessary. It should be possible for this caucus to agree on a  
> system of
> checks and balances that reflects and builds upon our statements in  
> Geneva.
> Among the elements we discussed were:
>
> *ICANN reform with the goal of multi-stakeholder composition
> *host country agreement
> *independent appeals body
>
> What we havn't discussed yet is an auditing function that could  
> cover in
> addition to finances also other parts of ICANN's tasks and work.
>
> jeanette
>

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance