[At-Large] Parminder’s assertion of Conflict of Interest / Expected Rules of Behavior
evan at telly.org
Tue Jan 4 07:41:07 UTC 2022
On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 at 01:20, Jeff Neuman via At-Large <
at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote:
Honestly, I am trying to understand your position, but having difficulty
> ascertaining the specifics other than your generalized statement that you
> believe I have a conflict of interest in serving as the GNSO Liaison to the
> GAC and/or the GNSO Liaison to the SubPro ODP while at the same time doing
> work for an entity seeking to become a contracted party . I would like to
> get these issues out of the way because it is not only distracting from the
> actual issues presented with respect to ICANN’s Accountability Mechanisms,
> but it is a clear attack on my credibility and character.
Some people doth protest too much.
Don't take it personally. ICANN is rife with conflicts of interest --
simply defined, being in any position of leadership or influence (a
"position of trust", as Merriam-Webetsr puts it
a group when you or your client/employer have a financial interest in the
decisions being made by that group.
It is well understood that ICANN really doesn't care about CofI, so long as
everyone declares and submits their SOIs etc etc. Behaviour that might get
employees fired or politicians recalled in other environments is perfectly
kosher here, because MSM. Those may be ICANN's rules, and I'm sure you
follow them to the letter. But some of us, perhaps, have higher standards.
And we're allowed to consider such personal standards when evaluating
unsolicited requests for help.
Here are the facts that I have provided:
All very nice.
The core fact relevant to me is that you came here begging (multiple
times!) for help with your pet project, from which you will benefit
financially should an intervention on this specific accountability issue be
resolved in your favour. If you don't see that as a conflict of interest I
can't help you. Fortunately, most others reading this will get it. There
are some here who will take unkindly to such a self-serving demand, given
that lack of accountability was never an issue you sought to bring to
ALAC's attention until it threatened your personal interest.
Want a better reception? Divest your ownership stake in .hiphop, lose it as
a client, then come back and let's have that talk about accountability.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the At-Large