[ALAC] Request for a snapshot view on next round new gTLD program outlook from the ALAC for the ICANN Board

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond]

Dear Rinalia,

I must admit that I am very surprised with the language used in your
request and the questions that are asked. There are currently several
processes which need to complete before a "next round" is even thought
of. The CCT-RT and the "New gTLD Subsequent Round PDP" are very careful
indeed in not presuming that a next round is going to happen, yet the
language which you use in your email appears to point toward the fact
that the Board is already intent on starting a "next round". Worse still
it asks the unbelievable question of whether we should set a target date
to work towards to initiate a next round? That would indeed be the best
way to repeat all of the mistakes that were done in the current round
and to irritate more governments and end users. The issue of a "next
round" is so unwelcome at present that if the term "next round" is used
in the CCT-RT, they need to put a dollar in a virtual swear box as a
penalty.

Judging from your email, I am in fear that the Board, in its current
wisdom, is far removed from understanding the current greed and lack of
public interest found from the current round of new gTLDs. I am
flabbergasted.

Kindest regards,

Olivier


On 13/06/2016 17:12, Rinalia Abdul Rahim wrote:
> Dear ALAC,
>
> In Helsinki, the Board will meet to discuss the outlook for the next
> round of the new gTLD Program.  To support our discussions, we would
> like to be informed by stakeholder views.
> I have been requested to obtain the view of the ALAC.  Would it be
> possible for the ALAC to provide a snapshot of its views on this topic
> in one slide?  Please note that this information and presentation
> format would be applied to each stakeholder group's views.
>
> Some questions to guide you:
> 1. Initiation of next round - do you think a date should be identified
> so that ICANN has a target to work towards?
> 2. Requirements for round initiation - what do you think should be in
> place before the next round is initiated?
> 3. Improvements - what elements of the new gTLD program should be
> improved for next round?
> 4. Other aspects that are of concern to the ALAC?
>
> For the Board to have a chance to review the slide before its
> discussion, it would be good to receive the slide by 23 June 2016 latest.
>
> I do understand that this is short notice.  If you do not have
> sufficient time to develop a formal position, informal input would be
> sufficient at this time and it would be appreciated.
> The Board is likely to revisit the topic again during its workshop in
> September.  There is thus another chance to provide a more extensive
> view, but for now the Board would just like to have a sense from the
> community on the topic to guide its early deliberations.
>
> Thank you in advance and apologies for the short notice. 
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rinalia
>
> on behalf of the ICANN Board
>   
>
>  
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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)

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20160613/48d87222/attachment.html>