<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">On 13 June 2016 at 23:44, Thomas Lowenhaupt </span><span dir="ltr" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><<a href="mailto:toml@communisphere.com" target="_blank">toml@communisphere.com</a>></span><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"> wrote:</span><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#CCCCCC" text="#000000">
<p>While I've not completed my research, your conclusion seems to
conform to the city's belief here in New York - that it need not
provide a process for participation by individual Internet users
in shaping the use of the .nyc TLD.</p></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif">That is absolutely untrue, unless New York and Paris are governed by self-appointing dictatorships.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif">If they are like most cities, over and above the regular high-level governance votes, there are certain levels of community participation in garbage collection, green spaces, parking regulations, urban planning, etc. If such processes exist they offer the (at least indirect) way to influence the cities' policies regarding their TLDs (though I would suggest that the other issues I mentioned are higher up the priority list of most citizens).</div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif">The case has yet to be made that pubic input into how cities run their TLDs is more pressing and important than, say policing.</div></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#CCCCCC" text="#000000"><p> Assuming that's the case, that
there's no clear responsibility on the part of ICANN or the
registry, what responsibility does the At-Large have with regard
to the needs of individual Internet users?<br></p></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif">In these cases, ALAC has zero input post-delegation unless the registry can be found in breach of its agreement with ICANN.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif"><br></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#CCCCCC" text="#000000"><p></p>
<p>To me, it would seem ALAC's role is to advise ICANN, politely,
that it botched things with regard to city-TLDs, and to suggest a
roadmap for reengaging individual Internet users with the
governance process.</p></div></blockquote><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif">This grievance claims to speak for issues related to all city gTLDs, yet after years and years and years at this tired complaint we have yet to hear from a single other city community that shares this issue. There is no other conclusion except that this clearly is not a globally applicable problem; ALAC should not get involved, instead leaving the discussion to the appropriate RALO for local handling if any.<br></div></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#CCCCCC" text="#000000"><p>Are you in agreement or have I missed something?</p></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif">A great much has been missed. But after so many failed attempts at re-raising the issue and refusal to address even basic answers and challenges, there is little conclusion but that the "missing something" is not only real but deliberate,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif"></div></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif">And, once again, no there is no agreement. Not to this.</div></div><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'trebuchet ms',sans-serif">- Evan</div></div><div><br></div></div>
</div></div>