Summary/analysis of comments

["Kieren McCarthy" <kieren.mccarthy@xxxxxxxxx>]

Posted by Kieren McCarthy, General manager of public participation, ICANN

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------

 

 

Summary of public comments for new organisational frameworks and principles

 

November 2007

 

 

 

Background

 

Over the past year, ICANN has been drafting a set of frameworks and
principles that outline, define and expand upon the organisation's
accountability and transparency.

 

An initial issues paper was put out for public comment, and combined with an
independent review of ICANN by the One World Trust, a draft set of
frameworks and principles was drawn up.

 

These were then put out for public comment and were also discussed at a
special meeting in San Juan in June. The feedback from that meeting and the
comment forum was summarised and posted. And that feedback has been used to
make some changes to the frameworks and principles. The resulting document
was put out for a final comment period and was the focus of a second public
meeting in Los Angeles in October.

 

The Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) has also provided advice on
accountability and the structure of these materials. 

 

Following this public comment period, a final version of the frameworks and
principles will be produced and put forward for Board review.

 

The frameworks and principles outline how ICANN is going to approach various
vital parts of its work, including releasing information; seeking
consultation; dealing with disputes; ICANN's finances; translation of
material into other languages; and how staff are expected to behave. In
total, two emailed comments were received.

 

This analysis attempts to summarize the relevant comments from the online
forum

Where possible and practical, individual comments have been attributed to
individuals or organizations by attaching initials to the comments.  A key
to the initials used can be found at the end.

 

 

General comments

 

One commenter argued that internal accountability would be stronger if there
was a direct election process for Internet users to select Board members,
rather than through the Nominating Committee system currently in place [DY].

 

There was concern expressed that the intention of the frameworks and
principles was unclear [EH]. There was a complaint that the summary/analysis
of the previous public comment period had not included some of the
commenter's points. Those points were then outlined [EH]. 

 

 

Contributors

DY      Danny Younger

EH       Edward Hasbrouck