<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Tati and Ayden,<div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>I personally I’ve not made up my mind that a third party, a consultant, is going to guarantee independence in the Ombudsman role. Most of arbitrators, law firm or other organizations with the background to do this are heavily business sided or, unaware of the multi stakeholder model, DNS and Internet Governance in general. It is far more easy to detect an in-house ombudsman misbehaving than an outsider you only see in a room or in an email. Even if we found someone big and neutral enough, the big ones will always have more access to them than the res of us.<div class=""><div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Business, law firms and governments will always try as hard as they can to bend the process and lobby, we are not going to change that and we for sure can keep up with it, but if that lobby is forced to be done in the inside of icann, with someone that is solely dedicated to the ombudsman role and who’s socializing is openly known and transparent, that cannot hide behind appointments or emails, the is far more easy for us to notice, point out and document. </div><div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>I do agree with the critics that the role has become much more demanding and important, and the current way it is built is outdated to the size and role of ICANN, specially after the IANA Transition. So we should demand for more documentation, deeper informs, more transparency and more rules and procedures, not so much for complaints, but for the ombudsman itself. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Cheers,</div><div class="">Martín</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 4 Jan 2018, at 12:23, Ayden Férdeline <<a href="mailto:icann@ferdeline.com" class="">icann@ferdeline.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="">Thanks for this, Tanya. I've made some minor edits to the document now, making the language a little more forceful, where appropriate, and also expanding upon the third point. Thanks for considering accepting them.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="protonmail_signature_block"><div class="protonmail_signature_block-user"><div class="">—Ayden <br class=""></div></div><div class="protonmail_signature_block-proton protonmail_signature_block-empty"><br class=""></div></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><blockquote type="cite" class="protonmail_quote"><div class="">-------- Original Message --------<br class=""></div><div class="">Subject: [NCSG-PC] Public comment on Ombuds Office<br class=""></div><div class="">Local Time: 4 January 2018 4:07 PM<br class=""></div><div class="">UTC Time: 4 January 2018 15:07<br class=""></div><div class="">From: <a href="mailto:t.tropina@mpicc.de" class="">t.tropina@mpicc.de</a><br class=""></div><div class="">To: ncsg-pc <<a href="mailto:ncsg-pc@lists.ncsg.is" class="">ncsg-pc@lists.ncsg.is</a>><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class="">Dear all,<br class=""></div><div class=""> <br class=""></div><div class=""> Farzaneh and I drafted a comment on the CCWG-Accountability Work Stream<br class=""></div><div class=""> 2 (WS2) draft recommendations on the ICANN Ombuds Office (IOO). The call<br class=""></div><div class=""> for comment and all the documents related to it could be found here:<br class=""></div><div class=""> <a href="https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ioo-recs-2017-11-10-en" class="">https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ioo-recs-2017-11-10-en</a>.<br class=""></div><div class=""> <br class=""></div><div class=""> Our draft is here:<br class=""></div><div class=""> <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LrMcu3zsTTyk1DG-2dbBMgzwjjxYxl-aHaYIS-iIGpQ/edit?usp=sharing" class="">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LrMcu3zsTTyk1DG-2dbBMgzwjjxYxl-aHaYIS-iIGpQ/edit?usp=sharing</a><br class=""></div><div class=""> <br class=""></div><div class=""> I will share the document with the list in the incoming days, would be<br class=""></div><div class=""> grateful if PC comments and amends it first -- or at least if you let<br class=""></div><div class=""> us, the penholders, know that you are comfortable with it. The deadline<br class=""></div><div class=""> is 14th of January, so we have some time, but would be great if it<br class=""></div><div class=""> remains open for comments from our membership, too.<br class=""></div><div class=""> <br class=""></div><div class=""> Cheers,<br class=""></div><div class=""> <br class=""></div><div class=""> Tanya<br class=""></div><div class=""> <br class=""></div></div><div class=""><hr class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class="">NCSG-PC mailing list<br class=""></div><div class=""> <a href="mailto:NCSG-PC@lists.ncsg.is" class="">NCSG-PC@lists.ncsg.is</a><br class=""></div><div class=""> <a href="https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc" class="">https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc</a><br class=""></div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div>_______________________________________________<br class="">NCSG-PC mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:NCSG-PC@lists.ncsg.is" class="">NCSG-PC@lists.ncsg.is</a><br class="">https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></div></div></body></html>