[At-Large] Auction Proceeds - where we are and what you can help

[Holly Raiche]

Thanks Evan

There is a process for deciding on what to do with the cash - and it will require lots of divergent hands up.  that said, I can think of two ways that money could be spent that would be in the community’s interests.  The first is to target those areas (i.e., the rest of the world outside the US and Europe) that did not figure significantly in the first round - to find out why, and to address those issues.  Thesecond (or maybe a part of it) would be IGF support.  If one of the  reasons for the US finally giving IANA to ICANN was about making sure the UN wasn’t in charge, there is an argument that the IGF should also not be beholden to the UN

Holly


On 13 May 2017, at 8:59 am, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:

> ​Oh and before anyone replies on procedure:
> 
> I am fully aware that this stage of the WG is dealing with broad criteria and not specific recipients.​
> 
> But in the world of Internet Governance, the IGF is in a category of its own and IMO it is reasonable to discuss its inclusion at a structural level at this point.
> 
> On 12 May 2017 at 18:55, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:
> I'm not sure that there's really a disagreement between Ken and John.
> 
> Informing the world of the function of the DNS -- and of ICANN's crucial role in that piece of infrastructure -- is both within scope and of high value. There are ways that this can be deployed in ways that don't constitute vanity and self-aggrandizing.
> 
> ---
> 
> Personally I'm a little surprised and disappointed by the fact nobody in this list, especially my civil society colleagues, are advocating use of auction proceeds to seed an ongoing endowment for the IGF. There are many important parts of Internet governance, but ICANN is the only one of them that attracts so much money and speculative/entrepreneurial behavior. ICANN could almost overnight render itself one of the global heroes of the Internet ecosystem if it provided ongoing support of other related bits such that the IGF could maintain vitality and independence.
> 
> Furthermore, it is in ICANN's selfish best interest to promote multi-stakeholderism throughout the universe of IG. If government multilateral activity can successfully encroach on the ecosystem due to weakness/failure of the IGF, then ICANN will surely be a target next.
> 
> Just a thought. If ALAC got behind this and the idea gained broad support, ICANN will find a way to define such action to be within scope.
> 
> (Disclosure: I have never even attended an IGF, so I am hardly acting in a self-serving manner in proposing this endowment. One doesn't have to be in the IGF to see its value.)
> 
> - Evan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Evan Leibovitch
> Toronto, Canada
> Em: evan at telly dot org
> Sk: evanleibovitch
> Tw: el56
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
> 
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20170513/7709b480/attachment-0001.html>