[ALAC] [GTLD-WG] ICANN staff repudiates community call for change on Morality & Public Order

[Cheryl Langdon-Orr]

Indeed Michael,  I'm certainly expecting  the next ICANN Meeting in
Cartegena  to be "very interesting indeed" and also trust that we as an
At-Large Community and ALAC  can be called upon to give what support and
'voice to opinion' on a number of issues  I hope and trust will be raised...


Cheryl Langdon-Orr
(CLO)



On 15 November 2010 23:09, Michael Palage <mike at palage.com> wrote:

> Evan,
>
> I share your concerns and just wanted to point out the irony of one of the
> first proposed changes in AGv5:
>
> This Applicant Guidebook is the implementation of Board approved
> consensus policy concerning the introduction of
> new gTLDs, and has been revised extensively via public
> comment and consultation over a two-year period.
>
>
> While some potential applicants continue to hold out hope that the AG will
> be finalized next month, the more likely reality is that the ICANN
> community
> will have a front row seat to the BIGGEST game of chicken between the ICANN
> Board and the GAC. Unfortunately, at this late stage ICANN staff (Kurt
> Pritz) has pretty much tuned out any further changes to the AG from the
> private sector.
>
> It is now up to the GAC to hold the line and bring about any substantive
> changes. In fact I would predict some of the fireworks to be on a scale not
> seen since the good old days of 1999-2000. Although no one will discuss it
> publicly, this game of chicken will also tie into the IANA contract which
> expires Sept 30, 2011.
>
> The next 6-12 months should prove very interesting.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gtld-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> [mailto:gtld-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Evan
> Leibovitch
> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 3:15 AM
> To: ICANN GTLD WG list; ICANN ALAC list
> Subject: [GTLD-WG] ICANN staff repudiates community call for change on
> Morality & Public Order
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> In the latest version of the new gTLD Applicant Guidebook, ICANN staff has
> essentially screwed its community.
>
> Despite broad agreement reached across members of the GAC, GNSO and
> At-Large
> on issues related to Morality and Public Order -- and a report that was
> unanimously endorsed by ALAC -- ICANN staff have explicitly rejected all of
> our basic requests. Literally, only the most cosmetic -- changing the name
> from "Morality and Public Order" to "Limited Public Interest" -- approach
> was taken.
>
> The sub-contracted Dispute Resolution Service Provider -- now renamed the
> Dispute Resolution Administrartor -- still exists, and many, many other
> changes have been rejected. Not ignored, but explicitly rejected by staff.
>
> Here is the redlined version of the new document:
>
> http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-dispute-resolution-procedures
> -redline-12nov10-en.pdf
>
> And here is the staff "explanatory notes"
>
> http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/explanatory-memo-morality-public-or
> der-12nov10-en.pdf
>
> This is awful on so many levels. It asserts staff supremacy over the bottom
> up process. It repudiates everything that ICANN claims to want in its
> improvements of Accountability and Transparency. It asserts that on any
> disagreement between staff and community, that staff should prevail.
>
> I am REALLY REALLY upset over this. This is an instance in which the GAC
> and
> ALAC were united in opposition to this completely odious piece of policy,
> and staff have literally shrugged it off in the name is "risk management".
> The only risk I see is the risk to ICANN policy staff making a mockery of
> every principle ICANN *claims* to want to uphold.
>
> I am angry enough to want ALAC to go beyond merely announcing its
> displeasure to the Board. I encourage everyone to real Milton Mueller's
> blog
> entry at
>
> http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2010/11/14/4679990.htmlwhi
> le
> contemplating what action to take.
>
> If we don't stand up for this, what is there to stand up for? ICANN created
> At-Large to provide input on some of its most important policy and -- now
> that we have provided it, in concert with other ICANN stakeholders -- its
> staff have laughed it off.
>
> How strongly is At-Large going to fight this disgrace? What are the
> candidates for Director going to propose? Where would the ATRT stand on a
> process by which stakeholders can be stopped in their tracks by staff,
> which
> has threatened to drag out the process longer should we complain and make
> us
> the scapegoats of all the TLD applicants waiting for their chance?
>
> This is truly disgusting.
>
> - Evan
> _______________________________________________
> GTLD-WG mailing list
> GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
>
> Working Group direct URL:
> https://st.icann.org/gnso-liaison/index.cgi?new_gtld_policy
>
> _______________________________________________
> GTLD-WG mailing list
> GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
>
> Working Group direct URL:
> https://st.icann.org/gnso-liaison/index.cgi?new_gtld_policy
>