What the AoC completely fails to address is the need to *separate* the issues and reviews of (1) the substance and wisdom of ICANN's decisions and (2) the procedures by which those decisions are made. Section 7 of the AoC mixes together review of "ICANN's progress against ICANN's bylaws, responsibilities, and strategic and operating plans". The Bylaws define procedures; the strategic plan defines substantive goals. These should be reviewed separately by separate entities. Combining these reviews steers the reviewers toward legitimizing any procedural failures on the grounds of their approval of the substantive results, and giving an overall "grade" to the combination of substance and procedure. This is the same thing ICANN has been doing for years in response to critics of its procedures. In a democracy, no amount of faith in the rightness of the results justifies an unfair process. By claiming that it needs to bypass due process in order to get what it (or staff or some insiders) think is the right result, ICANN shows an elitist and/or authoritarian contempt for democracy.