[governance] Re: ICANN Accountability and Transparency

[David Allen]

On Nov 13, 2011, at 5:21 PM, John Curran wrote:

> On Nov 13, 2011, at 1:40 PM, David Allen wrote:
>
>> B), modified - as the original noted:
>>
>> This is only the last in a long series of reviews and criticisms,  
>> over several years.  ICANN has brushed off each of those reviews,  
>> with perfunctory acknowledgement.  Over years.  Years.
>>
>> When the track record is so clear, protestations that 'things will  
>> be different this time,' just don't cut it.  Only action.
>
> I haven't indicated things will be different this time.

My post was in response to the request for basis.  Its discussion  
aimed to elucidate the thinking.  Re the immediately above, i.e.,  
"action, as opposed to words," that was hoped to help understand the  
thinking about why the "B" category and how modified.  (For reference,  
the full exchange is quoted below.)

(The 'protestations' had nothing to do with the query, or the person  
asking in the exchange - again, quoted below.  Yes, online text can be  
ambiguous, when folks are not able to sit down with each other.

(As said otherwise, discussion is about ideas, not about individuals,  
which otherwise can veer over into ad hominem. )

> I am simply asking for the your basis for suggesting that ICANN will  
> not implement the results of the ATRT review.


And as far as I can see, I provided just what was asked for ... in the  
query, to wit:

John Curran asked: (again, see below for full context)
> I'd like to understand the analytic basis of your premise ...


As you have quoted here, my basis is manifest.

>> Again, history and facts are determinative.  Including future  
>> history, when and as it may come to pass.
>>
>> This is a case where _only_ results, finally, can overcome the  
>> stain of a past record.  Not protestations.
>
> So do you believe that the following report (including the completed  
> actions to date) is not accurate, or for some reason does the  
> implementation that has occurred not count?
>
> <http://www.icann.org/en/accountability/atrt-implementation-summary-24oct11-en.pdf 
> >

As to this additional question:

The context here concerns - among others - sometimes-years of bottoms- 
up volunteer effort that is effectively ignored and, instead,  
preemptively overruled with staff decisions.

While I am glad to have the link to the pdf, there is nothing there -  
that I can see - suggesting the core concern is ameliorated, or even  
broached for consideration.

Also, notably, the area evincing the hot-button of relations with the  
other 'outside world,' GAC, has (except in only one item) no timeline  
or entries, only 'TBD.'

> Thanks,
> /John

The case rests.

Thanks, David
______

quote, for reference:

On Nov 13, 2011, at 12:58 PM, John Curran wrote:

> On Nov 13, 2011, at 12:37 PM, David Allen wrote:
>
>> Since discussion advances with evidence and logic, let's take the  
>> next steps with facts and analysis.
>>
>> Quoting from below, in reverse and various order.
>>
>>> There are system weaknesses that may be corrected with the  
>>> transparent monitoring and review through the public feedback  
>>> about the direct influence reflected on decisions of the external  
>>> public services.
>>
>>
>> _Long_ years - and years - of experience make clear that this most  
>> decidedly is not so.
>
> Strange.  The most recent effort in this area was the ATRT review:
> <http://www.icann.org/en/accountability/atrt-report-25jun11-en.pdf>
>
> Are you suggesting that: A) The ATRT review did not identify the key  
> changes
> necessary to provide the necessary accountability and transparency,  
> or B) that
> ICANN is not going to implement the results in an effective manner,  
> or C) some
> other reason why the ability of the community to correct ICANN's  
> weaknesses
> in these areas "most decidedly is not so" ?
>
> I'd like to understand the analytic basis of your premise in light  
> of the most recent
> ATRT review and action item followup activity.
>
> Thanks!
> /John

Thanks.

B), modified - as the original noted:

This is only the last in a long series of reviews and criticisms, over  
several years.  ICANN has brushed off each of those reviews, with  
perfunctory acknowledgement.  Over years.  Years.

When the track record is so clear, protestations that 'things will be  
different this time,' just don't cut it.  Only action.

Again, history and facts are determinative.  Including future history,  
when and as it may come to pass.

This is a case where _only_ results, finally, can overcome the stain  
of a past record.  Not protestations.

Thanks,  David


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111113/1eb507d9/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t