<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=gb2312">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"><!-- P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} --></style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"><!-- P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} --></style>
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;" dir="ltr">
<p>Dear Peter:</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Quitting NCUC is the right thing to do, so thank you for your decision. I hope you can remain active in ICANN as a representative of the CONAC registry. </p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>--MM</p>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Ncuc-discuss <ncuc-discuss-bounces@lists.ncuc.org> on behalf of Peter Green <seekcommunications@hotmail.com><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, August 1, 2017 4:29:41 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> ncuc@tapani.tarvainen.info; Farzaneh Badiei<br>
<b>Cc:</b> ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [NCUC-DISCUSS] Farewell to NCSG/NCUC</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif, EmojiFont, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', NotoColorEmoji, 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Android Emoji', EmojiSymbols;" dir="ltr">
<p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">I am really sorry and upset for making such a decision after my participation in NCSG/NCUC for 4 years.</span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Dear NCSG Chair Mr. Tapani Tarvainen, <o:p>
</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Though it is time to complete the annual NCSG membership check-in, I could not do so.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">It is my personal decision that I now conduct a check-out of NCSG as an individual member.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Dear NCUC Chair Ms. Farzaneh Badii,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Due to my personal decision of quitting NCSG, it’s not legal for me to be an individual member of NCUC, hence I now quit NCUC as an individual member.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Dear Maryam,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Could you please be kind to eliminate me from the membership list of both NCSG and NCUC ?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Could you please be kind to unsubscribe me from both the NCSG and NCUC mailing list <span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif, EmojiFont, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', NotoColorEmoji, 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Android Emoji', EmojiSymbols; font-size: 16px;">and
all related mailing lists</span>?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Thanks so much!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Keeing the email in my emailbox for days, i</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">t did take me a long and hard time to make this decision.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">The decision was based on my belief that I could not further be involved with NCUC with my legal individual membership eligibility questioned by different levels of cognition in terms of interpreting the NCUC membership
eligibility terms in the current effective NCUC Bylaws, which had been revised while not effective now.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">It was difficult for me to participate in NCUC with untrust in me.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">For avoidance of any further problems, I have no intention to participate in NCSG any more.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Since the former NCUC EC (2016-2017)’s illegitimate action in August 2016, requesting me as the Asian/Pacific Representative of NCUC EC to resign, I took this as a case to ICANN Ombudsman. </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Now
it has been a whole year and the case is ultimately over.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif, EmojiFont, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', NotoColorEmoji, 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Android Emoji', EmojiSymbols; font-size: 16px;">The case is over
with irreversible effect on me. I could not be part of NCUC with deserved trust.</span><br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I would like to extend my farewell to NCUC/NCSG.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> </span><br>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Thanks for those who had ever followed the case.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I wish you all know what happened and what are the real problems reflected in my case. (Please see the email below by Tapani, which is a great summary of this case.)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Thanks for those who support me!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I did learn a lot from you guys. It’s nice working with you over the last several years.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">NCUC is the start of my ICANN journey, which shall not be the end.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">There are many of you who I have never met. Looking forward to meeting you.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Still would see you in the ICANN community! Hope could see you in future ICANN meetings.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Wish you all good in your life and work.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Thank you all!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Best Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Zuan Zhang/Peter Green<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<br>
<p></p>
<br>
<br>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<div>
<hr style="display:inline-block; width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="x_divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000" style="font-size:11pt"><b>发件人:</b> Ncuc-discuss <ncuc-discuss-bounces@lists.ncuc.org> 代表 Tapani Tarvainen <ncuc@tapani.tarvainen.info><br>
<b>发送时间:</b> 2017年4月23日 19:00<br>
<b>收件人:</b> ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org<br>
<b>主题:</b> [NCUC-DISCUSS] Case Zuan Zhang aka Peter Green</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
<font size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;">
<div class="PlainText">Dear all,<br>
<br>
Now that we have seen the statement from former EC members as well as<br>
Zuan's response, it is time to review what happened and how, try to<br>
understand what went wrong and why, and what lessons we could draw<br>
from it.<br>
<br>
I must admit I find a big puzzling suggestions that we should not<br>
discuss this any more. Surely the point of making statements to the<br>
membership is to allow members to review and discuss them. And there<br>
clearly are open questions, issues that have not been discussed<br>
anywhere near thoroughly.<br>
<br>
Zuan was removed from the EC and by now his term would've expired long<br>
ago anyway, in that sense the case is closed - but it's only been just<br>
opened for analyzing what happened.<br>
<br>
******<br>
<br>
Transparency and due process are our core values, issues we keep<br>
pushing for in ICANN. I may be naive or idealistic in that, but I do<br>
believe we should try to live the way we preach as much as we can.<br>
<br>
And in this case transparency and due process did not fare well.<br>
<br>
Of course, being human we all make mistakes. I sure have made my share<br>
of them. And errors are always easier to see with hindsight.<br>
<br>
But when we do make mistakes, we should not try to forget them as soon<br>
as possible. Instead we should try to learn from them so we can do<br>
better in the future. It really isn't enough to say it "could have<br>
been handled better" without any suggestion as to how, or to note<br>
transparency concerns without actually addressing them.<br>
<br>
My intent is not to blame or accuse or embarrass anyone or determine<br>
guilt or anything like that. I see no reason to assume anyone acted in<br>
bad faith, and I will not name any potential culprits. Rather this a<br>
story of how even with the best of intentions things can go awry, and<br>
as far as I can tell the fault lies largely in the process, lack of<br>
proper procedures, and that's the main reason why I think it is<br>
important to understand what happened: we need to fix that, write up<br>
procedures so that things will be better next time.<br>
<br>
So, I'm not so much concerned with the who or even with the what but<br>
with the *how*.<br>
<br>
This discussion is particularly timely because NCSG EC has been<br>
working on detailed member removal procedural rules as per our charter<br>
2.2.6., and we're planning to it bring out the first draft for the<br>
membership to review within a few weeks. Having a precedent to reflect<br>
on should be most useful there.<br>
<br>
As for whether or not Zuan was actually ineligible for NCSG or NCUC<br>
membership at the time, I've refrained from taking a stand because as<br>
NCSG Chair I would not want to prejudge it in case it came to NCSG EC.<br>
But for the present purpose it doesn't matter much: it is sufficient<br>
to note it was not totally obvious, a foregone conclusion, but one<br>
where reasonably people could disagree, one in need of both<br>
fact-finding and rule-reading before reaching a decision.<br>
<br>
Another issue is if NCUC EC had (has) the right to expel or suspend<br>
its members. While there's no such right in old (current) bylaws, it<br>
can be argued it could be derived from some general principles, but<br>
surely that is not altogether obvious either.<br>
<br>
I do think there *should* be a way to remove EC members and I'm glad<br>
it's been taken care of in the proposed new bylaws. I don't see,<br>
however, how that could somehow vindicate actions taken under the old<br>
bylaws. If anything, the need for such a change could be seen<br>
indicating the old (current) bylaws did not give such right to the EC.<br>
<br>
But what I'm most worried about would be just as worrysome even if<br>
Zuan had been utterly and obviously ineligible and even if there had<br>
been explicit right in the bylaws for the EC to expel him (even though<br>
in that case things would probably have happened differently).<br>
<br>
******<br>
<br>
Let's take a look at what happened, as far as is publicly known.<br>
<br>
A brief timeline:<br>
<br>
(1) July 2016 (uncertain): One or more people complained about Zuan's<br>
eligibility to someone in the NCUC EC.<br>
<br>
(2) July-August 2016 (exact dates unknown): EC members, excluding<br>
Zuan, discussed the issue in a private email exchange and concluded<br>
that Zuan was ineligible to NCSG (or NCUC) membership and that<br>
therefore he should be removed from NCUC EC.<br>
<br>
(3) August 2, 2016: Zuan was notified of this by private email,<br>
stating it was NCUC EC conclusion, demanding his immediate<br>
resignation.<br>
<br>
(4) August 3, 2016: Zuan contacted NCSG Chair (me), having interpreted<br>
the message as an official decision to expel him from the NCSG as well<br>
as from the NCUC. I told him that NCUC EC had no right to make such a<br>
determination about NCSG membership, as that belongs to the NCSG EC.<br>
I also wrote to the NCUC EC members in question expressing my<br>
disapproval of the process.<br>
<br>
(5) August 8, 2016: the letter sent to Zuan was published on this list<br>
and it sparked a discussion that went on for some time.<br>
<a href="http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-August/019065.html" id="LPlnk911833" previewremoved="true">http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-August/019065.html</a><br>
<br>
(6) August 12, 2016: Zuan announced he'd take the issue to the Ombudsman and<br>
discussion on the list soon subsided, waiting for Ombudsman's actions.<br>
<a href="http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-August/019114.html" id="LPlnk18136" previewremoved="true">http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2016-August/019114.html</a><br>
<br>
(7) August 19, 2016: NCUC EC had a normal, recorded meeting to discuss<br>
the issue. Zuan did NOT participate, and the EC decided to suspend him but<br>
did not replace him, instead leaving his seat vacant.<br>
<a href="http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/2016-August/002991.html" id="LPlnk295192" previewremoved="true">http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/2016-August/002991.html</a><br>
<br>
(8) April 10, 2017: Former NCUC EC members statement about the case<br>
was posted to this list.<br>
<a href="http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2017-April/020478.html" id="LPlnk190614" previewremoved="true">http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2017-April/020478.html</a><br>
<br>
(9) April 13, 2017: Ombudsman posted Zuan's response.<br>
<a href="http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2017-April/020521.html" id="LPlnk399100" previewremoved="true">http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/2017-April/020521.html</a><br>
<br>
******<br>
<br>
Observations and questions:<br>
<br>
While current NCUC bylaws do not have anything about expelling members<br>
from the EC anymore than from NCUC itself, NCSG Charter does.<br>
Indeed the letter sent to Zuan only referred to NCSG rules, and in any<br>
case the elibility rules for NCUC are essentially same as for NCSG.<br>
<br>
So why wasn't this referred to NCSG EC? The initial complainants<br>
might well have been unaware of these legalistic details, but<br>
NCUC EC members certainly should have known them and notified<br>
NCSG EC about the situation.<br>
<br>
Second, if it was concluded Zuan was ineligible for NCSG (or NCUC)<br>
membership, why only remove him from the EC? Wouldn't it have been<br>
their duty to remove him from the entire NCUC (and notify NCSG EC so<br>
he could be removed from NCSG)?<br>
<br>
Third, the big procedural irregularity: why was the decision<br>
made in a private, still not published, email exchange?<br>
<br>
The only explanation given is that raising the issue in public "could<br>
have been construed as an intimidating public attack on Peter".<br>
<br>
While that's a fair reason as far as it goes, and I'm sure it was a<br>
real reason, there must've been something else, too, as it begs the<br>
question why Zuan was not included in the discussion earlier, indeed<br>
from the very beginning.<br>
<br>
He thought he was a member of the EC, equal to others. Then he is<br>
being told that others have met in secret, without him, and judged him<br>
without his participation and found him guilty, and are saying they<br>
made an official decision about him - a decision of the EC he's<br>
supposed to be a member of.<br>
<br>
It shouldn't take much psychological insight to predict that would not<br>
go down well. And trying to follow up by inviting him to defend<br>
himself in an official meeting after he knows he's already been judged<br>
and found guilty wasn't likely to help much either.<br>
<br>
Equally puzzling is why NCSG EC was not involved. If the case for<br>
confidentiality was good, there should have been no reason to assume<br>
NCSG EC would not accept it as well.<br>
<br>
We don't know what took place in that email exchange, so we can only<br>
guess why all those decision were taken that with hindsight seem so<br>
strange. And while I don't think we can force them to be published, on<br>
the other hand I do see any reason why people involved couldn't<br>
publish them if they so chose, and it might help us understand what<br>
really happened.<br>
<br>
I won't argue people should not have private conversations, but it<br>
does become problematic if such secret discussions become de facto<br>
fora for decisions that should be made publicly.<br>
<br>
Especially so in a case like this: expelling a democratically elected<br>
member of the EC is just about as momentous as decisions get, and<br>
given that it was indeed unprecedented and that there were no explicit<br>
rules about it in the bylaws, a public discussion would have been all<br>
the more important.<br>
<br>
But what is really unacceptable is to make and implement official EC<br>
decisions in secret. It is really beyond the pale, it is what really<br>
shocked me when I first learned about this.<br>
<br>
You can't have your cake and eat it, too. If you make an official<br>
decision it should follow all the rules and have all the trappings it<br>
implies, including proper documentation. If you only have a private<br>
conversation, its outcome is nothing but personal opinions, and<br>
shouldn't be claimed as anything more.<br>
<br>
******<br>
<br>
Analyzing in any detail the motivations and thoughts of people involved<br>
is beyond me and probably would not be constructive either. But I will<br>
offer one speculative suggestion:<br>
<br>
The real problem was (and remains) lack of trust.<br>
<br>
It seems pretty clear that at least some members of the NCUC EC<br>
distrusted Zuan, some distrusted NCSG EC and/or Chair, some people<br>
didn't trust NCUC EC, and some distrusted the process, didn't trust the<br>
rules we have to be good enough to handle the situation properly.<br>
<br>
******<br>
<br>
Finally, what could and should we do about this?<br>
<br>
Trust is notoriously difficult to build and to maintain. I don't have<br>
any magic solution to that. But there are things that can help there,<br>
and things that can ameliorate the bad effects of distrust.<br>
<br>
This will be important when we discuss the NCSG member removal<br>
procedures later in NCSG-DISCUSS and consider the impact of various<br>
procedural choices in detail.<br>
<br>
For now I'll conclude with the observation that it would help to have<br>
better, more explicit rules, and realistic rules, such that take into<br>
account human weaknesses, including the need to save face. In<br>
particular, if we think there're issues that should be discussed in<br>
confidence, and there might be, we should make rules about how and<br>
when it should happen.<br>
<br>
Comments welcome.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Tapani Tarvainen<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Ncuc-discuss mailing list<br>
Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org<br>
<a href="http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss" id="LPlnk180161" previewremoved="true">http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss</a><br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>