[ALAC-LT] URGENT Statement on P&I Bylaws

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Tue Sep 15 16:17:50 UTC 2015


I was charged to write the statement on the Policiy and 
Implementation Bylaws in full accordance with the ALAC's previous 
statement on the issue.

The statement was due last Friday, but unfortunately I could not get 
it done. Marika has been informed that it is coming and what the gist 
is, but we need to formally submit this ASAP.

Please comment if anything is radically wrong with the following.
====================================
ALAC and At-large representatives were very active in the Policy and 
Implementation Working Group and the ALAC supports the recommendations.

The ALAC nonetheless has two concerns that have been raised 
throughout the WG processes.

1.	All GNSO processes allow participation from all communities, and 
so in theory can equitably balance all issues. However, given that 
contracted parties have a very large stake in GNSO policy decision 
outcomes, they are in a position to, and often funded for significant 
participation. Those representing the public interest are less able 
to participate on the same level. Accordingly, it is possible for the 
WG participation to be unbalanced. Moreover, within the GNSO Council, 
the two contracted Stakeholder Groups acting in unison can block a 
super-majority approval of any prospective recommendation. As a 
result, the ALAC has concerns that if an issue were to arise where 
the public interest and the needs of users is in conflict with the 
needs of contracted parties, the GNSO may not be able to arrive at an 
equitable solution.

2.	Although the principle of referring all policy-like issues 
encountered during implementation back to the GNSO for resolution 
supports the concept of the GNSO being THE gTLD policy body, the ALAC 
is concerned that for complex implementations such as the new gTLD 
process and future directory services solutions, the number of such 
referrals may unreasonably elongate the overall implementation process.

As stated above, the ALAC supports the recommended processes, but 
ADVISES the Board to carefully monitor both issues to ensure that 
user and public interests are appropriately considered and that the 
implementation of complex policy can be accomplished in reasonable time-frames.



More information about the ALAC-ExCom mailing list