ICANN Ombudsman Blog
Robin Gross
robin at IPJUSTICE.ORG
Thu Sep 24 05:26:42 CEST 2009
FYI: https://omblog.icann.org/?p=192
(my comment at end)
ICANN Ombudsman Blog
September 23, 2009
Whither civility…..?
Filed under: cases and findings — Frank Fowlie @ 11:20 am
I have been researching a complaint concerning incivility and dis-
respectful online communication.
There are two documents which the community should be aware of. The
ICANN Transparency and Accountability Principles, approved in January
2008 and found at: http://www.icann.org/en/transparency/acct-trans-
frameworks-principles-10jan08.pdf, state on Page 28: “members of the
ICANN community should treat each other with civility both face to
face and online.”
The Statement on Respectful Online Communication may also be found
at: http://www.icann.org/ombudsman/respectful-communication-en.htm.
This document has been promulgated to the ICANN community through the
Ombudsman Annual report over the past two years.
I wonder if community members would consider the following sorts of
dialogue to be civil and respectful?
“….are of course a bunch of zombie-like followers and cannot see
that the right path is the one engendered and controlled by the ICANN
higher powers”
“You are free to engage in revisionist history now if you like, but
those of …know a different story very well.”
“Please, repeat that a few times until it sinks in:…”
“You and …… are quite a team and we look forward to your
continued mis-information campaign – and we stand prepared to debunk
it every time.”
Comments (7)
7 Comments »

Honesty and truth are more important than fake civility. We should be
encouraging more free speech, as long as it is true, rather than
trying to censor people that you deem to be “uncivil” or
“disrespectful.” Respect is earned.
ICANN has routinely ignored the public, even when they have been
thoughtful and civil. A bit of civil disobedience is a good thing
from time to time (of course, no violence or any other stuff like
that would be acceptable).
I have no problems with any of the above (which I’ve not written).
If we want people to post as “robots” without any style or flair
or passion, even more would be driven away.
Comment by George Kirikos — September 23, 2009 @ 12:29 pm

Wither confidentiality? Since anyone can Google for the phrases you
quote, haven’t you just outed your complainant?
Comment by Anonymous — September 23, 2009 @ 1:09 pm

Thank you for your comments. However, I must respectfully disagree
with you. No one is trying to censor anyone here. One simply hopes
that the level of debate in the broad spectrum stakeholder
environment would be professional, civil, and ethical. Name calling,
rudeness, and antagonistic dialogue do not act as a welcome
opportunity to move debate forward. It also does not create a
welcoming environment for participation in general.
I am certainly not suggesting fake civility. I am suggesting that
members of this community must see each other with genuine respect as
the staring point, and with genuine civility. No one involved in the
ICANN model should have to earn respect. Their involvement, no matter
for what duration, purpose, or time frame should be enough of a
starting point for all to be treated with civility and respect. Not
just as members of the ICANN Community, but as human beings.
I also disagree with you with your conjecture that the only way to
have style, flair or passion is to be uncivil or disrespectful. The
libraries of the world of full of the works of authors who have been
able to lead and inspire without resorting to name calling, rudeness
or creating intended hurt or contempt. The use of uncivil or
disrespectful communication is only a tool for the bully. It does not
promote conversation. In fact, those are the focus of intended dis-
respectful communication are likely to drop out of debate, or
organizations when they are ridiculed. Those who are watching the
debate are likely either not to offer opinions for fear of being
roughly treated, or to simply walk away form the table. I can’t
imagine any circumstance where polite and respectful communication
demeans a person to the point where they merit being called a robot.
There is a huge definition gap between civil disobedience, and crass
behaviour. Being uncivil or disrespectful should not create licence
to own or dominate debate at ICANN.
Comment by Frank Fowlie — September 23, 2009 @ 1:56 pm

Dear Annonymous.
Thank you for your comment. No, these are random comments I have
picked up while looking at some lists. There is nothing here linked
with the complainant. My object to to have a sense of some thing
things which are being posted, and use them as examples of conduct
which may be improved. Finally, these link back to the ICANN
Accountability Framework.
Hope that clarifies.
Comment by Frank Fowlie — September 23, 2009 @ 2:10 pm

Frank: All too often the “powers that be” are happy to label
anyone they disagree with as “uncivil” or “disrespectful” in
order to attempt to censor them. It’s a tool to suppress honest
speech. You don’t give the public enough credit to distinguish
honest, tough, but 100% fair speech from the rantings of lunatics. I
think the public is sophisticated to see that difference, to see when
folks can be 100% civil while also avoiding or obfuscating truths.
For example, I asked in one of the Question Box segments why ICANN
staff were researching my views on Obama. I gave them the exact time
stamp, IP address, etc. They know exactly who did it.
ICANN has been very “polite and civil” about denying that they are
even aware of things, even though it’s right on the mailing lists,
for example at:
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg02413.html
When Paul Twomey was questioned in D.C., he was certainly “treated
roughly” by the politicians. That’s sometimes the only way to get
answers, to the truth, when all other methods fail. Certainly
everyone is entitled to the same free speech that politicians can
engage in.
It says a lot about ICANN itself that folks sometimes *have* to use
harsh (but honest and truthful) language in order to be heard. If
ICANN was actually accountable, and listened when folks speak more
softly, the language wouldn’t have to be as harsh. Indeed, some of
the same people that speak harshly of ICANN speak softly when
speaking to other parties, because other parties actually do listen
and respond, unlike ICANN.
Comment by George Kirikos — September 23, 2009 @ 2:15 pm

i do not find these comments to be un-civil.
perhaps a bit blunt.
there is no ad-hominem attack
there is no name calling
no curse words
no Godwin arguments
true it is not all hearts and flowers and luvey dovey.
it was blunt and direct
name withheld for fear of retribution
Comment by Femme desJour — September 23, 2009 @ 2:44 pm

Again, I respectfully disagree with you. The scenario exampled here
is not “powers that be” attaching labels to behaviours. These were
quotes between members of the same community, seemingly unable to
debate without becoming less than civil. Actually, I fundamentally
believe that a demonstration of thoughtful, civil, and professional
discourse will create a greater opportunity to gain credibility and
put forward positions in debate that bullying language will. Again,
please be clear, we are talk about sample conversations between
participants here, not between ICANN (however you may define that)
and participants. I am absolutely certain that my inbox would be
flooded with complaints should the staff, board, or appointees use
this sort of language in communicating with the stakeholder community.
Comment by Frank Fowlie — September 23, 2009 @ 2:48 pm

Gosh Frank, your comments have taken a public decision about the
appropriateness of these comments already.
“… seemingly unable to debate without becoming less than
civil…. ”
Have you received a response yet from the accused (i.e. both sides of
the story)?
Have you considered that your comments here can be seen to be biased
in favor of the complainant and may contribute to “create”
community opinion in one direction?
I note you claim these are “random comments” and “There is
nothing here linked with the complainant.” However that has not been
my experience.
cc: NCUC
Comment by Robin Gross — September 23, 2009 @ 7:17 pm
IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin at ipjustice.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090923/d3b14ba7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 5ceab507a207a8fa6e66665f62758d16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 534 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090923/d3b14ba7/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 55502f40dc8b7c769880b10874abc9d0.png
Type: image/png
Size: 534 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090923/d3b14ba7/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dc079e5b95111e4ffd4f8268809bab45.png
Type: image/png
Size: 534 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090923/d3b14ba7/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dc079e5b95111e4ffd4f8268809bab45.png
Type: image/png
Size: 534 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090923/d3b14ba7/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 5ceab507a207a8fa6e66665f62758d16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 534 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090923/d3b14ba7/attachment-0004.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: aacfa71a148961aa5004f9e63958dff5.png
Type: image/png
Size: 534 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090923/d3b14ba7/attachment-0005.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dc079e5b95111e4ffd4f8268809bab45.png
Type: image/png
Size: 534 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090923/d3b14ba7/attachment-0006.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 6f5a3fb7f25f7c132baebf69b1c6272b.png
Type: image/png
Size: 534 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090923/d3b14ba7/attachment-0007.png>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list