Re: [ga] [Fwd: [address-policy-wg] ICANN Ratifies Global Policy for Allocation of IPv6 Address Space]
Michael D. Palage wrote: Hi Michael - It's good to see you chiming in on what I believe are a pair of very important issues, which are, the exercise of fully informed and independent judgments on matters by board members, and the perception (or lack thereof) by the community of internet users whether this is happening. I can attest that ICANN has had a long, and unnecessary, history of closed meetings - It started out at the Cambridge Mass meeting in 1997 (or 1998? - I do have the original video tapes at my office) in which Director Hans K. took the stance that for ICANN to be open it had to close its meetings. And I do remember the strong and overt body language of ICANN's chairman when I was on the board and I would take time during board meetings to try to ask a sequence of linked questions. Although every board member is equal in authority and power it is hard for us as people to reject negative signals from those who we admire. You and I, perhaps because we are both have legal training, understand that to ask a question need not be a sign of self-weakness or a sign that someone else is weak or bad. I do not believe that everyone in the ICANN community understands this. (I know that for myself, I sometimes tend to use words loaded with connotations and thus am perceived as being more aggressive than I intend. I can only aspire to your vastly greater skill in the art of barb-free language.) I do agree with you - I believe that things are getting better. It was unheard of for directors to file dissenting
For those who don't remember: I published an online diary of nearly every decision and vote I made during the 2 1/2 years I was on the ICANN board. It is still online at: http://www.cavebear.com/icann-board/diary/index.htm I wrote down the evidence I saw for and against a proposal, I set down how I valued the competing interests, and I described how I reached my decision. My groundrule was that I would describe my own views and try to avoid speaking for others. It was all there, in black and white, for the world to see - and criticize (and oh, people did criticize - and rightfully as, being human, I did many several errors.) These were often published within hours or a board meeting, often well before (years before in some cases) before the actual, and far less detailed, minutes were published. It took work to do that, but I see no reason why today's board members should feel unable to follow the path that I blazed, including a successful lawsuit against ICANN, to vindicate Director's legal rights to inspect corporate materials and facilities. I still believe that ICANN has gone about things in reverse order - it never created a body of principles to guide decisions. This has left a legacy of ad hoc meanderings. --karl--
|