[At-Large] ICANN Funding Request FY22-05
mmoll at ca.inter.net
Thu May 13 17:00:30 UTC 2021
I agree, Evan, that most people do not want to be involved in governance
-- but I think they would support the notion that there was a group
representing their interests at the governance table, that it was not
just commercial interests sitting at the table. The extent to which that
is important to the end user might be an interesting question.
On 5/13/2021 3:38 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> On Wed, 12 May 2021 at 19:19, Marita Moll via At-Large
> <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> <mailto:at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>> wrote:
> Ind. users might not distinguish the Internet from Facebook
> That is actually relevant to us, because that portion of the end-user
> base isn't really impacted by domain names at all if their whole
> online world is accessed through apps rather than domains. Yes, *we*
> know that Internet addressing is being used, but these end-users are
> hidden from it totally. I actually think it is valuable for ICANN to
> know how much of the Internet-using public never goes near a URL.
> -- but they might relate to governance and the role they think
> they should play in the governance of the Internet. Could that be
> a starting point?
> Not sure about that.
> IG is important to we who are engaged in it. But most people don't
> care about being involved in the governance of their electrical grid,
> public transit or air traffic control, and don't think of these
> things' governance at all unless something goes wrong. Internet
> domains -- a small part of the (physical, protocols, etc)
> infrastructure needed to connect people to the WWW -- are no different.
> It's something of a conceit among those inside the bubble (or a plea
> to share the load) to assert that everyone ought to get involved. I
> disagree. Everyone has lives to lead, and also has a right to expect
> reliable and trustworthy public infrastructure without having to get
> personally involved in its management. And some of them serve on
> governance boards for other parts of common infrastructure and wonder
> why we don't get involved with them. The broad objective of this
> project (IMO) is for ALAC to be better informed to react and create
> policy input based on the needs and priorities of those who are
> impacted by the DNS yet have neither the interest or available time to
> get involved in ICANN. This is fairly clear in ALAC's bylaw mandate.
> - Evan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the At-Large