[At-Large] ICANN Accountability Mechanisms

[Carlton Samuels]

Very thoughtful engagement here and for sure, all the top ones are listed
by Evan.  I think he missed just one thing, how to determine what is a
conflict of interest. Because there is a real need to reassess how that is
determined in ICANN councils.

Karl, yet again exhibiting his best form at synthesizing information,
linked the regulatory idea now empowering ICANN to the
Reaganite/Thatcherite view, which merely reprised the enabling framework
for the predations of the British East India Company and Leopold of the
Belgians. To the American polity, conflicts of interests are closely
coupled to the idea of lobbying; declare it and it passes the smell test.

Elsewhere in the world, that polity deems that same behavior as
bribery, before and after the fact. Go figure.

Carlton

==============================
*Carlton A Samuels*

*Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
=============================


On Sun, Jan 2, 2022 at 11:27 AM Evan Leibovitch via At-Large <
at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote:

> On Sun, 2 Jan 2022 at 04:30, parminder via At-Large <
> at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote:
>
>> Evan, since I like to look forward, that also makes me ask you -- what
>> would be your conception of a publicly accountable ICANN.. No, i dont need
>> the full architecture... Just what was missing and what should be, at a
>> larger framework level . But it is fine if you havent thought about it yet
>> in that way.. . thanks, parminder
>>
>
> Getting further off-topic, but now entertaining. Like Olivier, I enjoyed
> Barry's Usenet history and was brought back to days of Telebit modems,
> UUCP, and the nightly news dump. I myself ran some of those newsgroup
> elections, and was an occasional colleague of one of those demi-gods, Henry
> Spencer from the University of Toronto. I recall things being more
> structured than Barry did, thanks to the loose assembly of demigods known
> as the "Cabal" <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backbone_cabal>.
>
> But... back to Parminder's question. Bashing is easy, constructive
> solutions are always far tougher. I don't have a coherent and complete
> architecture, but there are a few principles I would like in a
> re-envisioned domain manager/regulator. I really can't separate these into
> "accountability" and "non accountability" measures since there's at least
> some A&T rationale baked into all of them:
>
>    - Fuller (ie, complete) separation of ICANN's technical and political
>    roles. That means that issues such as root-server coordination and security
>    are better handled by groups like IETF
>
>    - A governance model such that the public interest comprises the
>    decision-makers and the industry players are advisors. This of course
>    represents a 180-degree swap of the current situation in ICANN but is more
>    in line with normal governance elsewhere.
>
>    - A "use it or lose it" regime for domains similar to what exists for
>    trademarks, complete with aggressive anti-squatting policy (OK, maybe this
>    one doesn't have much to do with A&T but it's critical)
>
>    - The price governments pay for a seat at this table is making domain
>    use and allocation subject to a treaty that ensures interoperability and
>    heavily constrains domain takedowns. That would avoid bullshit such as the
>    "Universal Acceptance" initiative, which was created to beg the world to
>    honour ICANN's policies because right now everything is taken in
>    (diminishing) good faith. A treaty would also eliminate ICANN's coy "we're
>    not a regulator" whining and enable credible enforcement.
>
>    - Creation of a financial model such that the org that regulates
>    domain names isn't dependent on their volume or rental fees for its
>    sustainability
>
>    - And finally, a Nominating Committee that actually *nominates*. That
>    is, it creates a slate of names for consideration by electors rather than
>    choosing the winners itself. I like the CIRA dual-slate model that allows
>    for a Nomination Committee slate while enabling a second slate of
>    "nominations from the floor" for people who are popular but shunned by the
>    NomCom.
>
> Sorry you asked?
>
> - Evan
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20220102/ea155182/attachment.html>