RE: [ga] ICANN and censorship (and ombudsman ineffectiveness)

["Debbie Garside" <debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi George

I wonder if the nature of the 1500 complaints to the 30 actually resolved
would compare to 1500 posts on this list where an estimated 30 posts are
actually of any interest.  I am not saying that this is the case but if it
were, and I suspect a good proportion are of a similar vein, one could
understand the ombudsman's reluctance to get involved.

Perhaps, as an exercise in transparency, the Ombudsman could publish details
of the complaints.  Or is this already the case?

Best regards

Debbie
(resent with GA included)

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
George Kirikos
Sent: 25 September 2009 11:17
To: GNSO GA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ga] ICANN and censorship (and ombudsman ineffectiveness)


Hi folks,

Just to followup on my prior post which referenced the very serious breach
by the Ombudsman of confidentiality (let alone raising free speech
questions)

> https://omblog.icann.org/?p=192

I note my most recent attempt to comment on the blog has been censored (or
put into a "moderation" queue, to presumably be examined by the thought
police to determine whether it's "acceptable to them"). I called for an
audit of the Ombudsman, especially in light of the fact that in *5* years,
the number of complaints that he's actually resolved is miniscule, barely
registering on the graph.

Here's my uncensored comment:

--- uncensored comment begins ----------
Kieren: People have the right to be “aggressively critical” whenever they
see something wrong happening. It’s people who are wrongdoers that benefit
by attempting to stifle that critical speech. Perhaps one day you’ll have
greater sophistication and be able to appreciate why free honest and
truthful speech is valued in our society, far above “false civility.” Kent
Crispin of ICANN appears to have that sophistication. Yesterday he wrote:

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg03235.html

“They undermine and demean the extremely valuable contributions of serious
longtime ICANN critics like Danny Younger, George Kirikos, and others. (Just
for the record — I really respect the contributions of these critics, and
sometimes I agree with them. I believe that sentiment is shared by many
people on the ICANN staff.)”

I am sure those “others” would include Robin, Avri, and Milton.

As for Frank, there’s been a serious breach of confidentiality of a
complaint here. There was no reason for this blog post at all, and certainly
not the examples that he used coming directly from someone’s formal
complaint. That’s inexcusable.

Yesterday the Ombudsman released his annual report. Page 18 of it had a
graph at the bottom right, see:

http://www.icann.org/ombudsman/documents/annual-report-2009-24sep09-en.pdf

In 5 years, the number of complaints marked “resolved” barely registers on
the graph. Eyeballing it, it seems to be under 30. This contrasts with over
1500 where the Ombudsman declined to get involved. That says it all about
his lack of effectiveness, and lack of true independence from ICANN. While
the Ombudsman claims “neutrality”, he does know that his paycheque comes
from ICANN. If he were to be truly critical of ICANN in his findings (e.g.
look at comment #16 and read the Ombudsman File 09-29 and see how
unsatisfactorily that was handled), he might find his continued employment
at risk. An independent audit should be done to determine the effectiveness
of the Ombudsman, as part of the audit of ICANN that others like CADNA have
called for recently.
--- uncensored comment ends ----------

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.leap.com/




Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date: 15/05/2009
06:16
 

Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date: 15/05/2009
06:16