[NCUC-DISCUSS] Fwd: [Gnso-coordination] Continuous improvement principles re GNSO & Council

Benjamin Akinmoyeje benakin at gmail.com
Mon Oct 7 22:33:18 CEST 2024


Dear Milton and Kathy,
Thank you for sharing your views liberally; others have also expressed your
opinions. I will wait for more reactions from the list and then forward the
feedback to Chris as our response.


Kind regards,
Benjamin

On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 6:06 PM Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:

>
> Ben, thanks for initiating this.
>
> I agree with you that number 4 can be problematic. What does it mean for a
> SO to be "accountable" externally? This should be changed to something like
> "adheres to ICANN's mission and fundamental bylaws." SOs are supposed to be
> representative organizations that develop policy. The constituencies within
> SOs are intended to represent, and be accountable to, specific stakeholder
> groups. To say that they are also accountable to everyone and anyone is
> either meaningless (impossible to measure), or something that can cause
> conflict among stakeholder groups (SGs), because one SG can claim that
> another SG is "not accountable" because it doesn't serve that other SG's
> interests. And since there is no effective standard for determining whether
> an organization is accountable to the entire world, this cannot do any good
> but could do harm; e.g., copyright and trademark holders might claim that
> GNSO is not "externally accountable" because it doesn't always pass
> policies favorable to trademark and copyright interests.
>
> The GNSO and ICANN as a whole need to be working within the mission and
> bylaws, but it is too vague and potentially troublesome to claim that all
> SOs and SGs are accountable to a "wider community" and "the global Internet
> population." ICANN as a whole is supposed to be externally accountable to
> the global Internet population, but that accountability is expressed
> through the mechanisms and constraints of the mission and bylaws. It is
> more focused and meaningful to say that a SO should be accountable to its
> own stakeholders. The whole system of ICANN policymaking - not a single SO
> - is supposed to be accountable to the global Internet community.
>
>
> Dr. Milton L Mueller
>
> Georgia Institute of Technology
>
> School of Public Policy
>
>
>
>
> Dear NCUC members,
> I would like input in deciding whether all these principles are
> appropriate. This request had been sent out previously however the emphasis
> is on number 4.
>
> This is the question the GNSO participants in the Continuous Improvement Program
> Community Coordination Group (CIP-CCG) like to know. You can know more
> about  *Continuous Improvement Program Community Coordination Group* (CIP-CCG)
> can be found on this  link <https://community.icann.org/display/CIP> below
>
>
>
>
>    1.
>
>    The SO, AC, or NomCom is fulfilling its purpose.
>
>
>
>    2.
>
>    The structures of SO, AC, or NomCom are effective.
>
>    3.
>
>    The operations of SO, AC, or NomCom are efficient.
>
>    4.
>
>    The SO, AC, or NomCom is accountable internally to its stakeholders
>    and substructures (where applicable), and externally to the wider ICANN
>    community in benefit of the global Internet population.
>
>    5.
>
>    The SO, AC, or NomCom collaborates to further the mission of ICANN.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: *Chris Disspain via Gnso-coordination* <gnso-coordination at icann.org>
> Date: Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 11:14 AM
> Subject: [Gnso-coordination] Continuous improvement principles re GNSO &
> Council
> To: <gnso-coordination at icann.org>
>
>
> Hello All,
>
> As previously discussed, our job as the GNSO SG reps to the Continuous
> Improvement CCG is to agree a set of principles that will apply to the GNSO
> and GNSO Council’s continuous improvement efforts.
>
> The current principles from the draft CIP CCG document are below. Bearing
> in mind that the GNSO CCOICI will be the group that develops the criteria
> that sit under the principles and that, whilst not essential, it would be
> optimal if the overarching principles were the same for all SOs and ACs,
> can we live with these and if not, what amendments would we like to see?
>
> It would be great to hear back from everyone by next Tuesday 1st October
> so we can feed our comments into the next CIP meeting on 2nd.
> 
>
>    1.
>
>    The SO, AC, or NomCom is fulfilling its purpose.
>
>
>
>    2.
>
>    The structures of SO, AC, or NomCom are effective.
>    3.
>
>    The operations of SO, AC, or NomCom are efficient.
>    4.
>
>    The SO, AC, or NomCom is accountable internally to its stakeholders
>    and substructures (where applicable), and externally to the wider ICANN
>    community in benefit of the global Internet population.
>    5.
>
>    The SO, AC, or NomCom collaborates to further the mission of ICANN.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-coordination mailing list -- gnso-coordination at icann.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-coordination-leave at icann.org
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Kathy Kleiman <Kathy at KathyKleiman.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, October 7, 2024 9:30 AM
> *To:* Mueller, Milton L <milton at GATECH.EDU>
> *Subject:* Fwd: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Fwd: [Gnso-coordination] Continuous
> improvement principles re GNSO & Council
>
>
> Hi Milton,
>
> You are the expert in these areas. Thoughts welcome!
>
> Best, Kathy
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Fwd: [Gnso-coordination] Continuous improvement
> principles re GNSO & Council
> Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2024 08:44:51 +0200
> From: Benjamin Akinmoyeje <benakin at gmail.com> <benakin at gmail.com>
> To: NCUC-discuss <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
> <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>
> Dear NCUC members,
> I would like input in deciding whether all these principles are
> appropriate. This request had been sent out previously however the emphasis
> is on number 4.
>
> This is the question the GNSO participants in the Continuous Improvement Program
> Community Coordination Group (CIP-CCG) like to know. You can know more
> about  *Continuous Improvement Program Community Coordination Group* (CIP-CCG)
> can be found on this  link <https://community.icann.org/display/CIP> below
>
>
>
>
>    1.
>
>    The SO, AC, or NomCom is fulfilling its purpose.
>
>
>
>    2.
>
>    The structures of SO, AC, or NomCom are effective.
>
>    3.
>
>    The operations of SO, AC, or NomCom are efficient.
>
>    4.
>
>    The SO, AC, or NomCom is accountable internally to its stakeholders
>    and substructures (where applicable), and externally to the wider ICANN
>    community in benefit of the global Internet population.
>
>    5.
>
>    The SO, AC, or NomCom collaborates to further the mission of ICANN.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: *Chris Disspain via Gnso-coordination* <gnso-coordination at icann.org>
> Date: Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 11:14 AM
> Subject: [Gnso-coordination] Continuous improvement principles re GNSO &
> Council
> To: <gnso-coordination at icann.org>
>
>
> Hello All,
>
> As previously discussed, our job as the GNSO SG reps to the Continuous
> Improvement CCG is to agree a set of principles that will apply to the GNSO
> and GNSO Council’s continuous improvement efforts.
>
> The current principles from the draft CIP CCG document are below. Bearing
> in mind that the GNSO CCOICI will be the group that develops the criteria
> that sit under the principles and that, whilst not essential, it would be
> optimal if the overarching principles were the same for all SOs and ACs,
> can we live with these and if not, what amendments would we like to see?
>
> It would be great to hear back from everyone by next Tuesday 1st October
> so we can feed our comments into the next CIP meeting on 2nd.
> 
>
>    1.
>
>    The SO, AC, or NomCom is fulfilling its purpose.
>
>
>
>    2.
>
>    The structures of SO, AC, or NomCom are effective.
>    3.
>
>    The operations of SO, AC, or NomCom are efficient.
>    4.
>
>    The SO, AC, or NomCom is accountable internally to its stakeholders
>    and substructures (where applicable), and externally to the wider ICANN
>    community in benefit of the global Internet population.
>    5.
>
>    The SO, AC, or NomCom collaborates to further the mission of ICANN.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-coordination mailing list -- gnso-coordination at icann.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-coordination-leave at icann.org
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20241007/24595299/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Outlook-rymjrqzh
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6749 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20241007/24595299/attachment.jpe>


More information about the Ncuc-discuss mailing list