[ALAC] Community Priority Evaluation Update from ICANN

JJS jjs.global at gmail.com
Wed Aug 21 04:01:15 UTC 2013


*Rinalia & Carlton,*
*All,

*
*as a regular reader of The Economist, I can vouch for the fact that it is
one of the best weeklies in the world.** That being said, I suggest that
someone (ALAC?) raise a few questions of principle with whoever chose EIU:
- Was there an open call for tenders? Was this done only in
English-language outlets? Was this sent out to a limited number of possible
competitors, say in the English-speaking world, more specifically limited
to countries connected with (and beneficiaires of) PRISM and/or ECHELON?
*
*- What were the criteria? Were these published?
*
*- What are the terms of the contract (remuneration, confidentiality
clause, obligation to include certain segments of the Internet user
community)?
*
*- Who chose the winner? The Board? The New gTLD Committee, or its
Chairperson? Senior Staff?

*
*We can (rightly) argue about details. But let's not forget that defending
the global public interest requires a constant attention to global
principles.
*
*
*
*Jean-Jacques.
*


2013/8/19 Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com>

> Dear Rinalia:
> See my thoughts inline.
>
> Best,
> -Carlton
>
>
> ==============================
> Carlton A Samuels
> Mobile: 876-818-1799
> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
> =============================
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 3:32 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim <
> rinalia.abdulrahim at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear ALAC Colleagues,
> >
> > ICANN published news about the Community Priority Evaluation (CPE) on 16
> > August 2013 (last Friday).
> >
> > *Highlights from the announcement (
> >
> >
> http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/announcements-and-media/announcement-4-16aug13-en
> > ):
> > *
> >
> > ·       -CPE will begin late September 2013
> >
> > ·       -Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) is the sole CPE panel firm
> > (there is no mention of Interconnect Communications)
> >
> > ·       -EIU has developed a set of guidelines based on Applicant
> Guidebook
> > criteria.  *View the guidelines document
> > »<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/cpe/guidelines-16aug13-en.pdf
> > >[PDF,
> > 803 KB]
> > *
> >
> > ·       Input can be provided on the guidelines by emailing
> > newgtld-cpe at icann.org with a very short deadline (30 August 2013 at
> 23:59
> > UTC).  Inclusion of input is entirely at the discretion of the CPE panel
> > firm.
> >
> Looks to me like they sending the message 'we got this'. Wonder where they
> got this attitude?
>
> >
> > ·       The last 2 pages of the CPE guidelines list the EIU’s
> > qualifications for community evaluations, which in my opinion confirm the
> > ALAC’s concerns about having relevant and appropriate community-related
> > expertise in the CPE panel.  (See extracted text on the EIU at the end of
> > this mail).
> >
> > *Thoughts*
> >
> > 1. Our statement to the board on community expertise in the CPE stands in
> > terms of validity.  Let's see what the response is (if any).
> >
> > 2. Who conducts the training for the CPE evaluators is an open question.
> >
>
> The objective of these evaluations may have been misconstrued by the EIU,
> especially when 'community' seems yet to be an enigmatic concept. So the
> training would be critical to bringing the contractor back to fold.  The
> trainer[s] therefore is/are the next best level for minimal assurance that
> our interests are recognized.
>
> >
> > 3. The time constraint is a significant deterrent in providing any
> > consultative form of ALAC/At-Large comment or input (if any).  Whether or
> > not the community wishes to comment specifically on the evaluation
> > guidelines is an open question.
> >
>
> See above.
>
> >
> > *[Extract from pages19-20 of the CPE Guidelines on the EIU]*
> >
> > The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) is the business information arm of
> > The Economist Group, publisher of The Economist. Through a global network
> > of more than 900 analysts and contributors, the EIU continuously assesses
> > political, economic, and business conditions in more than 200 countries.
> As
> > the world’s leading provider of country intelligence, the EIU helps
> > executives, governments, and institutions by providing timely, reliable,
> > and impartial analysis.
> >
>
> We know of the EIU; there are always grumblings about their published
> analyses in my part of the world but relations have improved some since
> they hired a few local stringers. Its the data that goes into the pot for
> analysis that churns for the output so local interpretation has helped.  In
> context and IMO, they can truly safely say they have expertise in analysis.
>  What I'm not sure about is whether the frameworks in which their expertise
> is legion fits in our concept of 'community' or they will have accessed the
> 'right' data points.
>
> >
> > The EIU was selected as a Panel Firm for the gTLD evaluation process
> based
> > on a number of criteria, including:
> >
> > ·       The panel will be an internationally recognized firm or
> > organization with significant demonstrated expertise in the evaluation
> and
> > assessment of proposals in which the relationship of the proposal to a
> > defined public or private community plays an important role.
> >
>
> Devil in the details; again in concept of our understanding of 'community',
> how many 'public...community' evaluations have they done.  I'm not sure the
> interests of money centre bankers and bondholders would rank high in our
> concept.
>
> >
> > ·       The provider must be able to convene a linguistically and
> > culturally diverse panel capable, in the aggregate, of evaluating
> > Applications from a wide variety of different communities.
> >
> So here's a bit of light. Maybe they will come up with evaluators that
> could get our seal of approval.  Maybe a followup statement should double
> down here.
>
> >
> > ·       The panel must be able to exercise consistent and somewhat
> > subjective judgment in making its evaluations in order to reach
> conclusions
> > that are compelling and defensible, and
> >
>
> Let's see the criteria and we should have guidance on possible outcome.
>
> >
> > ·       The panel must be able to document the way in which it has done
> so
> > in each case.
> >
> > The evaluation process will respect the principles of fairness,
> > transparency, avoiding potential conflicts of interest, and
> > non-discrimination. Consistency of approach in scoring Applications will
> be
> > of particular importance.
> >
> > The following principles characterize the EIU evaluation process for gTLD
> > applications:
> >
> > ·       All EIU evaluators must ensure that no conflicts of interest
> exist.
> >
> > ·       All EIU evaluators must undergo training and be fully cognizant
> of
> > all CPE requirements as listed in the Applicant Guidebook. This process
> > will include a pilot testing process.
> >
>
> This might be less than useful since the AGB is itself short on
> definitional agreement of 'community'.
>
> >
> > ·       EIU evaluators are selected based on their knowledge of specific
> > countries, regions and/or industries, as they pertain to Applications.
> >
>
> So we would need to look for broad understanding of the DNS and specific
> knowledge of the DNS market in underserved communities.
>
> >
> > ·       Language skills will also considered in the selection of
> evaluators
> > and the assignment of specific Applications.
> >
> > ·       All applications will be evaluated and scored, in the first
> > instance by two evaluators, working independently.
> >
> > ·       All Applications will subsequently be reviewed by members of the
> > core project team to verify accuracy and compliance with the AGB, and to
> > ensure consistency of approach across all applications.
> >
> > ·       The EIU will work closely with ICANN when questions arise and
> when
> > additional information may be required to evaluate an application.
> >
> > ·       The EIU will fully cooperate with ICANN’s quality control
> process.
> >
> >  [End of Extract]
> >
> >
> > Any views on this?
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Rinalia
> >
>
> -Carlton
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > ALAC mailing list
> > ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> >
> > At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> > ALAC Working Wiki:
> >
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>



More information about the ALAC mailing list