[Chapter-delegates] FW: Ethos/PIR/ISoc statements regarding ICANN's rejection of the sale of PIR/.ORG

[Christian]

Let's correct the confusion - not extend it. Chapters should stick to 
the high ground.

The PIR sale was a pivotal initiative of the current ISOC board. So it's 
letter was written as a very interested party. It responded as such or 
at least its response cannot be disentangled from that motivation.

That is unfortunate because there is widespread and longstanding 
frustrations that ICANN is delving into issues well beyond a "technical" 
competency.

In different circumstances a statement from this community on how the 
multi stakeholder functions can be effectively institutionalised to 
observe and integrate competencies between MS and international 
institutions and local jurisdictions is still a "thing" that needs more 
buy in.

So it is obviously important that this community is not tarred as "just 
an interested party". One reason why the future of ISOC's ownership of 
PIR is a valid discussion.

So any further advice on the PIR sale might be best focused on working 
this stuff out by establishing lessons learned and building a consensus 
around our objectives institutionally.

C


On 07/05/2020 08:51, Winthrop Yu via Chapter-delegates wrote:
>
> +1 Richard, +1 Olivier. That "official" ISOC statement strikes me as 
> somewhat petty, and more importantly, i do have concerns that it may 
> be read as representing the sentiments of ISOC as a whole. Will the 
> ChAC have to draft yet another advice/statement?
>
> YMMV,
>
> WYn
>
>
> On 7 May 2020 5:34 am, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via Chapter-delegates 
> wrote:
>>
>> On 05/05/2020 11:33, Richard Hill via Chapter-delegates wrote:
>>> However, in my view, the allegation that ICANN didn't merely enforce a
>>> contractual clause, but instead exceeded its mandate and violated its
>>> bylaws, is a serious attack on ICANN's legitimacy. In my view, such an
>>> attack should have been consulted with the membership, in keeping with the
>>> spirit, if not the letter, of the cited policy development process.
>> It saddens me to have to say that the allegation did not have a place 
>> in an official ISOC comment. It is unsubstantiated, is indeed 
>> arguable (for or against) and I fail to see any benefit to attacking 
>> another I-Star decision, apart from weakening the multistakeholder 
>> model as a whole. Some countries at the ITU must be laughing.
>> Kindest regards,
>>
>> Olivier
>> -- 
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society Chapter Portal (AMS):
> https://admin.internetsociety.org/622619/User/Login
> View the Internet Society Code of Conduct: https://www.internetsociety.org/become-a-member/code-of-conduct/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20200507/d035e25b/attachment.htm>