[governance] Re: The due diligence process for ICANN NomCom appointees
Avri Doria
avri at acm.org
Fri Dec 17 09:54:44 EST 2010
Dear Adam,
Thanks for notification of these changes, they seem like steps in the right direction.
Unfortunately, to my mind, legal staff and perhaps others, are still involved in the parts of the process that should be secret due to privacy concerns. So my warning to be careful and consider carefully still stands.
I know that for myself, after years of having applications in the front of the Nomcom, over half of which were successful, I have withdrawn my name from consideration by any group that has ICANN staff involvement. I am saying that so that people don't assume I am recommending care and possible avoidance of a process I will be taking advantage of. In my view, until such time as ICANN Staff is replaced in the Nomcom process by an outside contractor I do not believe the process can be trusted. The ICANN Staff should not be in the position to affect the choice of volunteers by either acts of commission or omission, nor should they be hold private information about Directors and other volunteers. I am _not_ making claims that the private information has been misused, the situation is too opaque for me to know, but the situation is such that it could happen and it looks like it could happen. This is a situation that I believe needs to be remedied.
I also add that I am saying this as someone who is strongly supportive of ICANN and its progress towards becoming a genuinely multistakeholder organization, and as someone who believes in the ICANN Nomcom process, despite wanting to see it improved.
a.
On 17 Dec 2010, at 09:24, Adam Peake wrote:
> Avri, hi
>
> One of the issues NomCom took away from our meeting with the non-commercial stakeholders group in Cartagena was concern about due diligence. We discussed it at our first meeting last week, we will look into it and will make improvements.
>
> And the long silence candidates have endured is also something we will try to fix, I hope with regular notes, a blog reporting on what we're doing <http://icann2011nomcom.wordpress.com/>, and better communication with candidates. ICANN NomComs always struggle over the desire for openness and the need to protect confidentiality, plus the usual problem that volunteers lack time. There's been a general trend in ICANN towards increased transparency, we'll try to follow it.
>
> I hope people won't be put off from becoming candidates. The request for statements of interest will be released very soon. NomCom appointees have done much to improve ICANN. Some extremely good directors and people who have been chairs of the Board, GNSO and ALAC have come through the NomCom. I agree people should be participate in working groups, that's where a lot of the work gets done, but ICANN also needs leaders who will promote the public interest.
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>
>
>> Hi George,
>>
>> All well and good. I have only advised people to make sure they knew what they were getting into.
>>
>> I find it interesting to now know that the Corporate Secretary, also an ICANN legal staff employee, is informed of all of the private information obtained. In the past, I was told no one from ICANN staff saw any of it. Now we know it is at least nobody - 1 see it. What about the rest of his staff, also ICANN employees? Anyone else? The opacity of this process, consistent with ICANN's culture of secrecy, makes the entire chain of custody for the private information very suspect.
>>
>> Note, I agree with the need for due diligence when if comes to Board members who have fiduciary responsibility. I do not agree with the ICANN Staff being responsible for it or having access to this information.
>>
>> As for the arduous process, I was not referring to the due diligence per se. That is just a simple form where you sign away your privacy rights, and I have signed it several times. I am referring to the application process and the long forms required of one's references. And then the long wait in the dark while the process unwinds with the only news one gets being the rumors that always leak. I encourage people to know what they are getting involved in.
>>
>> I encourage people to consider the nomcom process, but I warn them to make sure they know what they are getting into first. But I mostly ask them to consider getting involved in the give and take of ICANN's working group process where the work is actually done.
>>
>> a.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 16 Dec 2010, at 10:52, George Sadowsky wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> I would respectfully disagree with Avri's reaction to the privacy implications of the degree of due diligence that ICANN applies to selected nominees for the positions to be filled by the Nominating Committee. I speak from my experience as Chair of the Nominating Committee in 2005, 2006, and 2007, and I doubt that the due diligence process has changed significantly since that time.
>>>
>>> Being on the Board of a Corporation comes with a serious fiduciary responsibility for its proper fiscal management. Corporations must perform adequate due diligence on prospective Directors. We have all seen news reports of people who claimed non-existent degrees, or worse, licenses to practice medicine. It's important to ensure that there is an adequate understanding of the backgrounds of people to whom Directorships are offered. A lesser degree of due diligence is appropriate for membership on the Councils of the Supporting organizations.
>>>
>>> I have executed due diligence processes for the NomCom for three years. With one exception that required full discussion, only I and the Corporation Secretary have been privy to the results. Further, I have gone through the due diligence process myself, and I found it neither objectionably invasive nor uncomfortable.
>>>
>>> Bottom line: if you are interested in ICANN leadership positions, I would encourage you to apply, and to consider the due diligence process an understandable and necessary part of the selection process.
>>>
>>>
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>> At 8:58 AM -0500 12/16/10, Avri Doria wrote:
>>>> On 16 Dec 2010, at 07:12, Adam Peake wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> http://blog.icann.org/2010/12/planned-changes-to-ipv4-reverse-dns-infrastructure/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, this <http://blog.icann.org/2010/12/2011-nominating-committee-opens-up/>
>>>>>
>>>>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Adam
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Think carefully before you get involved in the the ICANN nomcom process. Make sure you understand the incredible degree of privacy you will have to give up to ICANN and its hired investigators before going through a very long and arduous process that is likely to leave you, and those you ask for references, feeling very burned.
>>>>
>>>> It is not that I recommend against getting involved, and I encourage as many people as possible to get involved in the working groups and other efforts that are open to all. I just recommend caution when getting involved with its Nomcom - get a full picture first of what they will ask of you, especially if you are chosen. And make sure you are comfortable with the role of the ICANN staff, the access they (especially their legal department) may or may not have with the information their investigators find and the degree of guarantee you are given on the protection of your privacy.
>>>>
>>>> a.
>>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>>
>> For all list information and functions, see:
>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
For all list information and functions, see:
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list