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

Mon Nov 15 16:31:45 UTC 2010

On 15 November 2010 11:19, Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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...

"Voice an opinion" takes many forms. It can be a meek statement in a public
comment forum, an easily-ignored letter to the Board, or it can be the kind
of forceful stand that Robin and Cheryl did to help kill the IRT.

In this case I think we really need to consider a strategy that results in
the latter. We've laid the groundwork in the ALAC statement on the Rec6
report, and we owe it to the community we claim to speak for, to follow
through.

- Evan

>
>
> 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<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<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/explanatory-memo-morality-public-order-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
>>
>
>