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

[Rinalia Abdul Rahim]

Hello, Evan.  I have missed seeing you at ICANN meetings.  These are
excellent questions and to my mind the kinds of things that ought to be
posed to the Board and the rest of the community.  I would
suggest tweaking the last question to include staff as well.

Best regards,

Rinalia

On Tuesday, 14 June 2016, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:

> ​Hi Rinalia,
>
> I wholeheartedly endorse Olivier's response.
>
> To complement his point, IMO there are an crucial question missing from
> your list that ought to be asked BY ALAC of the Board:
>
> - What is the public-interest justification for the new round?
>
> - What research has ICANN done to demonstrate *any* demand for another
> round from outside of the vested-interest domain selling and reselling
> industries?
>
> - As sales of domains from gTLDs in the previous round have dramatically
> underperformed expectations, and a number of previous-round applicants have
> encountered stability issues, how will the influx of yet another round
> expected to increase the stability of the DNS? Might it not have the
> opposite effect?
>
> - What lessons has the Board learned from the experiences of the last
> round?
>
> In order for the ALAC to provide useful advice, such feedback would be
> useful.
>
>
> On 13 June 2016 at 17:12, Rinalia Abdul Rahim <
> rinalia.abdulrahim at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','rinalia.abdulrahim at gmail.com');>> 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
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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)
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Evan Leibovitch
> Geneva, CH
>
> Em: evan at telly dot org
> Sk: evanleibovitch
> Tw: el56
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20160614/5760b3d1/attachment.html>