[governance] ICANN RFC on its performance

Sun May 13 18:38:46 EDT 2007

Kieren

As Guru noted your email is incredibly arrogant, more so for a manager of
public participation - shows how such good terms can be easily abused. When
I read your email, I wondered hard why you would have written like this. I
have my differences with ICANN, but I know most ICANN people to be
intelligent and smart. And I thought I may just be over-reacting, and that
my reactions to the language of your email may be because of a cultural
difference. Well, on that note, be convinced that a big majority of people
in the world would be plainly insulted by the way you have asked for
contributions/ inputs/ participation. But then, on deeper thought, I saw it
that it wasn't just a cultural thing..

You as a manager of public participation came on to a public group, IGC -
one of the main ones that deals with IG issues, and whose mainstream culture
is same as yours - western, generally, if I may so generalize - and this is
what you say about that group... that 'this list seems to discuss little
else' (meaning ICANN) and that the discussion is basically a set of 'usual
rants' ('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') and that 'I
will not be considering material in response to this post'. So, it is really
disappointing that this is your view of, and about, the public that you seek
participation from.  

And I, and many others, who still feel that this IGC group itself is largely
'North'-based and 'North'-oriented, and  just not representative enough of
most of the world, wonder if this is your view of this 'public' what would
you think of the wider 'public' which we want included more and more in IG
issues and its decision making.. 

>I am ICANN's general manager of public participation. That means I consider
it *my job* 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.

So, let me tell you about how well you are doing your 'job'. Few things have
put me off from engaging with ICANN so much as your single email has. I
normally have good respect for ICANN and its people, and I have said so in
my emails to this list. However, I was surprised to see that others close to
ICANN failed to recognize the gaffe you made in writing this email to the
IGC in this manner. Veni tells us that "He (Kieren) is not required to be
part of this list, but he decided to do so, and that's called showing a good
will". Think we should all kneel in gratitude.. And a board member, Joichi
Ito, writing from a board retreat, came out in support of Kieren's email,
though in a latter email Joichi seem to feel that things did go overboard a
bit. 

Now, Kieren, I doubt whether you are able to make much of what I am speaking
here about the wider public and their participation etc. So, I will try to
make it simple, trying to stay within your 'language'. You say your job is
to 'encourage participation and input from the Internet community'. It is a
simple assumption that for doing your job you would know what constitutes
this 'Internet community' you are trying to encourage participation from.
Can you clarify it to me? And since your job description is 'public
participation manager' you would know which is this public you seek
participation from is? Is this 'public' same as the 'internet community'? Is
internet community the technical/ professional Internet guys (ISOC's
definition, it seems) or is it all Internet users, or is it all people of
the world? 

I know I have asked these questions before, but it is one of my 'usual
fantasies about how ICANN can be restructured' (your words). But leaving my
fantasy aside, I cant see how you will be able to undertake your job of
public participation without being able to provide to me the description and
contours of this public? Do you think this is an unreasonable question to
ask you/ ICANN?  I think it is a question without which we can t even start
the process of public participation. But I doubt you can answer this simple
question. Such is the political nebulousness in which ICANN exists, and then
it throws up such righteousness as your email does, in sheer self-doubt. 

Parminder 

________________________________________________

Parminder Jeet Singh

IT for Change, Bangalore

Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities 

Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890

Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055

 <http://www.itforchange.net/> www.ITforChange.net 

  _____  

From: Kieren McCarthy [mailto:kierenmccarthy at gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 7:57 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] ICANN RFC on its performance

I recognise that raising this may be the online equivalent of throwing a
lump of meat to a pack of starving wolves, but then *not raising it* seemed
more stupid to me because of the depth of knowledge and expertise on this
list.

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. 

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.

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. 

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). 

I am ICANN's general manager of public participation. That means I consider
it *my job* 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

So, that RFC:

As part of an ongoing interest in continuous improvement, ICANN is seeking
community feedback about its performance. 

All responses are welcome. Targeted comments regarding several areas of
performance, which have been drawn from the ICANN Strategic Plan, are of
particular interest:

*	Is ICANN becoming more transparent, accessible and accountable? What
improvements have been observed and what still needs to be done?
*	Has ICANN improved its operational performance? What improvements
have been observed and what still needs to be done?
*	Has ICANN improved its performance in the development of Policy?
What improvements have been observed and what still needs to be done?
*	Has ICANN increased international participation? What improvements
have been observed and what still needs to be done?
*	Have there been improvements in participation and in efficiency of
the ICANN multi-stakeholder model? What more needs to be done?
*	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?
*	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.

Comments will be received at http://forum.icann.org/lists/performance-2007/
until June 5, 2007 and should be sent to: performance-2007 at icann.org.

You can see this announcement here:
http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-08may07.htm

I have also put up a blog post about it (open to comments) here:
http://blog.icann.org/?p=125

And I have created a page on the Public Participation site (wide open and
proud of it) here: http://public.icann.org/issues/performance

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.

And please do spread the news of this RFC as far and as wide as you can.

Cheers. See you all in Geneva in a few weeks.

Kieren

Kieren McCarthy

General manager of public participation, ICANN

kieren.mccarthy at icann.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070514/dbc728d7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: message-footer.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070514/dbc728d7/attachment.txt>