<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /></head><body bgcolor="#CCCCCC" text="#000000">As a first step, perhaps you should look at all of the application forms and registry agreements, particularly for those that are Community TLDs, and see what they committed to.<br>
-- <br>
Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On May 13, 2016 4:16:47 PM EDT, Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml@communisphere.com> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<p>Louis,</p>
<p>It certainly would be good to know the level of engagement for
IIUs in Paris and the other newly TLD'd cities. Perhaps the
At-Large could craft a questionnaire to gather the state of
affairs, to be distributed as widely as practicable. Certainly one
might imagine excellent penetration in those cities with ALSes.
From there we might develop a report of use to many. <br />
</p>
<p>What's the best tool for creating a questionnaire these days? <a href="https://www.surveymonkey.com/">Surveymonkey</a> seems to
be priced right? Anyone with experience in this area? Is there a
better alternative? Are there others in the ICANN community that
might be interested in a project of this sort?<br />
</p>
<p>Best,</p>
<p>Tom Lowenhaupt<br />
</p>
<br />
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/13/2016 2:51 PM, Louis Houle
wrote:<br />
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:57362223.4090401@oricom.ca" type="cite">
Hi Tom,<br />
<br />
Why is the situation rather opaque in .NYC. Because inclusiveness
is not promoted ? Because transparency is not an integrated
process in the pratices of the management team (the meetings are
held behind closed doors? )<br />
<br />
Governments obey to a set of rules and processes that they
control. This includes the input or contribution from third
parties regarding the direction to follow the management approach,
etc. I understand that this the situation that you're cought with.<br />
<br />
Your suggestion to get ICANN on board is certainly appropriate. Is
it the only approach for you to advocate for a governance process
for NYC? I don't know if other city TLD are facing a similar
situation as the one you described. For instance, Dot-Paris is
managed by the city under the authority of the mayer. Would it be
useful to document how they address governance issues including
the multistakeholder model ? Would it be useful to get the GeoTLD
Interest Group on board also?<br />
<br />
At Dot-Quebec, the Board adopted a very openned governance
approach. Anybody who can contribute is welcome, but it's a
not-for-profit organisation. It's not lead by the government even
though we received a financial and political support for the
project. We support the multistakeholder model but for the new
members of the Board, it needs to be explained. We have people
with various and strong CV, but mostly no ICANN experience for
some of them. Knowledge sharing is useful then, but it is still
necessary to have a partner who is willing to listen.<br />
<br />
Regards<br />
<br />
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Louis Houle
President
ISOC Quebec
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Louis.Houle@isoc.quebec">Louis.Houle@isoc.quebec</a>
</pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Le 2016-05-12 12:49, Thomas
Lowenhaupt a écrit :<br />
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:c73ca640-e4b9-3b66-633c-a470744b6a82@communisphere.com" type="cite">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><font size="+1">Joly,<br />
<br />
In response to my post contending that the multistakeholder
model was not effectively meeting the needs of individual
Internet users (IIUs) in New York City you said:<br />
</font>
<blockquote>
<ul>
<li><font size="+1">"But are we? ALS's and individuals
can join RALOs, who in turn can influence the ALAC,
who advise the ICANN board."</font></li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<font size="+1">That's correct. And that's what I'm doing
right now.</font></div>
<blockquote>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">
<ul>
<li><font size="+1">"Or do you mean locally? Well, we
elect our representatives on the NYC City Council, who
are subject to their constituents, at least in
theory."</font></li>
</ul>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><font size="+1">Following that line of thought we really don't
need a city council or mayor at all. After all, we also have
a democratically elected congress and president. Why bother
with city government? Just call your congress member about
the pothole, garbage pickup, or idea for a park improvement.
And indeed you can. But my congress member represents about
700,000 people and avers to the local council member who
represents 160,000 residents. He has close ties, that
include budgetary control, with the local service providers
- the pothole fillers, sanitation and parks departments. So
for local service delivery issues it's better to go local.
And in this instance, with .nyc, I think we have agreed to
go down one more layer and engage the stakeholders in the
process. And indeed, ICANN talks bottom-up and
multistakeholder. Minimally, minimally, ICANN could send a
notification to the local ALSs when a city registry
agreement change is proposed. And it would seem reasonable
to provide the opportunity for that ALS to respond, and for
that response to be considered. One might argue that it is
the ALS's responsibility to keep an eye on ICANN's
activities. And that's a good idea. And I support and look
forward to the day when we're provided by ICANN with a
budget to hire a staff member for that task. But for now it
seems ICANN's generating a letter about proposed changes to
the registry agreement is the simpler way to go. <br />
</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">
<blockquote>
<ul>
<li><font size="+1">"There was an advisory board for .nyc.
It hardly met, and the meetings it had were closed.
You were on it. It could've done something to break
its chains if the will was there, surely."</font></li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<font size="+1">As I recall the situation, the city created
the advisory board under duress - there was a challenge to
their .nyc application from Connecting.nyc Inc. After the
.NYC Community Advisory Board's creation the city retained
tight control over its operation. It appointed members,
scheduled the meetings, and set the agenda. I informed
media-types about the meetings, but they were excluded by
the representatives of the mayor. Additionally, even city
officials were excluded. Council member Gale Brewer's
representative, whom I invited, was told to leave the room
when he showed up. And as I mentioned previously, when they
abolished it on December 31, 2014 they wiped out any sign of
its existence from its website. But you're right, those
chains probably could have been broken short of
self-immolation. I just never figured out how. Where are we
now? While we've taken a hit with the abolition of the .NYC
Community Advisory Board, I'm still trying to get a
governance process started where IIUs can meaningfully
participate in a governance process. My latest thought is to
get ICANN, via the ALSs, on board and advocating for a
multistakeholder governance process, one that includes IIUs.
Any thoughts on how to achieve this are most welcomed.<br />
<br />
Best,<br />
<br />
Tom Lowenhaupt<br />
</font></div>
<font size="+1"><br />
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><font size="+1">On 5/12/2016 1:19
AM, Joly MacFie wrote:<br />
</font></div>
<blockquote cite="mid:CAM9VJk3bHATcmkKqbd=XWecCRfw1-4-Xw+wMoJTYOidV6R3Q1g@mail.gmail.com" type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><font size="+1"><br />
</font>
<div class="gmail_quote"><font size="+1">On Thu, May 12,
2016 at 12:09 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:toml@communisphere.com"></a><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:toml@communisphere.com">toml@communisphere.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br />
</font>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p><font size="+1">The point I'm trying to make is: If
we've all accepted the multistakeholder model, how
is it that the local ALSes and individual Internet
users (residents and organizations as well) are
left out of the decision making process?</font></p>
<p><font size="+1">Tom</font></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<font size="+1"><br />
</font>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><font size="+1">But are we? ALS's and individuals can join
RALOs, who inturn can influence the ALAC, who advise
the ICANN board.</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><font size="+1"><br />
</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><font size="+1">Or do you mean locally? Well, we elect our
representatives on the NYC City Council, who are
subject to their constituents, at least in theory.</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><font size="+1"><br />
</font></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><font size="+1">There was an advisory board for .nyc. It
hardly met, and the meetings it had were closed. You
were on it. It could've done something to break its
chains if the will was there, surely.</font></div>
<font size="+1"><br />
</font>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><font size="+1">j</font></div>
<font size="+1"><br clear="all" />
</font>
<div><font size="+1"><br />
</font></div>
<font size="+1">-- <br />
</font>
<div class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><font size="+1">---------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<span>Joly MacFie <span title="Call with Google
Voice"><span id="gc-number-63" class="gc-cs-link" title="Call with Google
Voice">218 565 9365</span></span> <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="Skype:punkcast"></a><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="Skype:punkcast">Skype:punkcast</a></span><br />
--------------------------------------------------------------<br />
-</font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<font size="+1"><img moz-do-not-send="true" src="https://t.yesware.com/t/b3b03f93acb29dde874548d979c14638352bd06e/1dc07f4bf13a367f509656ff50ff0a3f/spacer.gif" style="border:0; width:0; height:0; overflow:hidden;" height="0" width="0" /><img moz-do-not-send="true" src="http://t.yesware.com/t/b3b03f93acb29dde874548d979c14638352bd06e/1dc07f4bf13a367f509656ff50ff0a3f/spacer.gif" style="border:0; width:0; height:0; overflow:hidden;" height="0" width="0" /></font></div>
</blockquote>
<font size="+1"><br />
</font> <br />
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br />
<pre wrap="">------
NA-Discuss mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org">NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss">https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss</a>
Visit the NARALO online at <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.naralo.org">http://www.naralo.org</a>
------</pre>
</blockquote>
<br />
</blockquote>
<br />
</blockquote></div></body></html>